PFD report

Maia Hazel Ann Strachan · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 28 May 2019•Newcastle upon Tyne

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
6

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
6

Described in responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised6

  1. Failure to use Foetal Scalp Electrodes for critical fetal distress information
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to provide fetal monitoring when clinically required
  2. Suboptimal clinical documentation
    Part of recurring concern: Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records
  3. Lack of patient-specific sequential scan data storage and sonographer alerts
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable clinical safety-alert systems
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.4

  1. Action

    Conduct ongoing monthly documentation audits, produce quarterly Board reports, and share themes to inform multidisciplinary learning and training.

    Stated by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 2 August 2019.
  2. Action

    Complete a documentation audit whose findings inform documentation training.

    Stated by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 2 August 2019.
  3. Action

    Circulate the redacted expert report to all Obstetrics and Gynaecology staff, including midwives, to inform future practice.

    Stated by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 2 August 2019.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to use Foetal Scalp Electrodes for critical fetal distress information

Wider context from the report

“(4) Foetal Scalp Electrode: The use of Foetal Scalp Electrodes (FSE) provide critical information in respect of foetal distress and the time implications thereof. The Trust should draft and implement a clear and comprehensive Local Policy/Protocol for FSE use. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide fetal monitoring when clinically required.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Suboptimal clinical documentation

Wider context from the report

“(5) Suboptimal Documentation: The Trust should implement a robust training and audit plan to address the risks of this occurring in the future. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete, inaccurate or unavailable clinical and care records.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of patient-specific sequential scan data storage and sonographer alerts

Wider context from the report

“(1) The ability to store sequential scan data specific to each patient and provide alerts to the Sonographer. This would facilitate comparison and prompt further investigation potentially altering a patient’s care plan and outcome. The Trust’s plan to procure software to facilitate the above should be urgently implemented. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable clinical safety-alert systems.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to provide advice and explanations for informed pregnancy and delivery decisions

Wider context from the report

“(3) Joint Decision Making: - Provision of advice and explanation of the risks of pregnancy and the risks/benefits of vaginal delivery or by Caesarean Section are essential to ensure informed decision making. The Trust should draft and implement a clear and comprehensive Local Joint Decision Making Policy/Protocol. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate informed-consent processes for medical treatment; Unreliable mode-of-delivery decision-making.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Failure to circulate independent expert findings and conclusions to relevant maternity staff

Wider context from the report

“(6) The Findings and Conclusions of ████████ (Independent Expert Witness): A redacted copy of ████████ report and conclusions should be circulated to all obstetrics and gynaecology staff (both nursing and medical) and all midwives. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Unavailability of clinician access to obstetric and diabetic records

Wider context from the report

“(2) A system of joint obstetric and diabetic care operates without the facility for clinicians to access patients’ obstetric and diabetic records whether manually or electronically. Accessibility is essential to inform clinical decisions and should be urgently addressed ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable access to relevant clinical records for safe care.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Conduct ongoing monthly documentation audits, produce quarterly Board reports, and share themes to inform multidisciplinary learning and training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“This audit has until recently been completed annually however this has been superseded by a recent agreement within the Surgical Business Unit for an ongoing monthly audit of a specific number of notes in each speciality. There will be a”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Complete a documentation audit whose findings inform documentation training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Current training around the required standard for documentation has been reviewed and is provided, as part of the PROMPT annual training for all team members including midwives and obstetricians. The content of the training is informed by the findings of a recently completed documentation audit.”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Circulate the redacted expert report to all Obstetrics and Gynaecology staff, including midwives, to inform future practice.

Verbatim wording from the response

“2. You raised concern about the midwifery care in the second stage of labour; and planned to share a redacted copy of the expert report provided by Dr Sparey for circulation to inform future practice.”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Review and provide PROMPT documentation training for midwives and obstetricians, informed by documentation audit findings.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Current training around the required standard for documentation has been reviewed and is provided, as part of the PROMPT annual training for all team members including midwives and obstetricians. The content of the training is informed by the findings of a recently completed documentation audit.”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 1 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.2

  1. 1

    Appoint medical examiners within the Trust.

    Stated by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 2 August 2019.
  2. 2

    Discuss whether medical examiners should be included in maternity bereavement pathways.

    Stated by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 2 August 2019.

Recipient positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when they do not describe a specific action.1

  1. 1

    HSIB undertakes independent investigations of cases meeting Each Baby Counts criteria under NHS Improvement’s direction.

    Stated by Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation TrustRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Appoint medical examiners within the Trust.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust has recently appointed medical examiners and discussions are in progress to identify whether there is a requirement to include them into the current pathways following bereavement in maternity services. Any further requirement to notify the Coroner of any stillbirth would also be incorporated into local pathways. We look forward to further discussions with you regarding Coronial input into training.”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Discuss whether medical examiners should be included in maternity bereavement pathways.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust has recently appointed medical examiners and discussions are in progress to identify whether there is a requirement to include them into the current pathways following bereavement in maternity services. Any further requirement to notify the Coroner of any stillbirth would also be incorporated into local pathways. We look forward to further discussions with you regarding Coronial input into training.”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

HSIB undertakes independent investigations of cases meeting Each Baby Counts criteria under NHS Improvement’s direction.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition to this the Healthcare Safety Investigation Branch (HSIB) has been asked by NHS Improvement to undertake independent investigations into cases where the inclusion criterion for Each Baby Counts has been met. The Trust was included in the roll out of this reporting going live in March 2019.”

Source location

Maia-Strachan-Response
Page 2 · response
Published 2 August 2019

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
1/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026