PFD report

Rainer Wickens · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 20 May 2014•Surrey

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
7

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
10

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 raised7

  1. Potential for serious injury from vulnerable and unsupervised residents accessing stairs
  2. Delays in remedial action following SUI reports
  3. Poor verbal communication at handovers between treating doctors
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable clinical handover processes
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.3

  1. Action

    Investigate every case of hospital-acquired thrombosis, undertake root-cause analysis and disseminate the resulting learning.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  2. Action

    Present Serious Incident actions to the Patient Safety Committee and audit action-plan progress twice yearly.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  3. Action

    Implement the Serious Incident panel’s recommendations through assigned senior leads, completing outstanding actions by 31 July 2014.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStatus at responseThe respondent said that this action was partly complete when they made their response on 20 May 2014.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.1

  1. Position

    Existing monitoring and audit processes are considered sufficient to prevent slippage in implementing Serious Incident action plans.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustExisting arrangements considered sufficientThe respondent said that existing arrangements were sufficient, so no further action was needed.

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

Potential for serious injury from vulnerable and unsupervised residents accessing stairs

Wider context from the report

“I would be grateful if you could re consider the appropriateness of allowing such vulnerable and unsupervised residents access to the stairs given the potential for serious injury. ”

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

Delays in remedial action following SUI reports

Wider context from the report

“Delay in commencement of inquiry of the SUI report and the impact of the delay on remedial action re impact on patient treatment ”

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

Poor verbal communication at handovers between treating doctors

Wider context from the report

“Poor verbal communication at handovers between treating doctors ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable clinical handover processes.

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 of communication between junior doctors and radiologists causing delay in CTPA

Wider context from the report

“Breakdown in communication between junior doctor and radiologist resulting in avoidable delay of CTPA ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable CTPA investigation and follow-up; Unreliable communication of patient-care information between clinical staff.

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

Delays in commencing inquiry of SUI reports

Wider context from the report

“Delay in commencement of inquiry of the SUI report and the impact of the delay on remedial action re impact on patient treatment ”

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

Gaps in medical notes

Wider context from the report

“Gaps in the medical notes ”

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

Failure to provide timely treatment for clot formation

Wider context from the report

“Although Mr Wickens was at risk of clot formation, he remained untreated for clot formation for 10 hours in A&E ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Investigate every case of hospital-acquired thrombosis, undertake root-cause analysis and disseminate the resulting learning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As you are aware, the SI investigation highlighted a number of failures and missed opportunities in the care provided to Mr Wickens. The SI investigation and the learning outcomes have since been shared with the immediate teams who had looked after Mr. Wickens and will continue to be disseminated through various patient safety initiatives as described above. You will also be pleased to hear that we now investigate and undertake root cause analysis and disseminate the learning on all cases of hospital acquired thrombosis.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Present Serious Incident actions to the Patient Safety Committee and audit action-plan progress twice yearly.

Verbatim wording from the response

“All actions are presented to the Patient Safety Committee and a regular audit of the actions contained within any SI action plan is also presented to the committee on a bi-annual basis. The Patient Safety Committee meets monthly and is a Trust Board sub-committee with the remit of ensuring that actions are implemented and learning is shared.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Implement the Serious Incident panel’s recommendations through assigned senior leads, completing outstanding actions by 31 July 2014.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The SI panel made a number of recommendations in the final report. All actions have been assigned to senior staff to lead on implementation. Some of these actions have been completed with the rest due for completion by 31 July 2014.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Existing monitoring and audit processes are considered sufficient to prevent slippage in implementing Serious Incident action plans.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I would also like to provide assurance relating to your concern that the timelines for implementation of the actions identified in Mr. Wickens’ case could slip. The trust does have routine and stringent processes in place to ensure that all actions from all SIs are monitored and audited, as described above. I will be very happy to provide you with an update of the actions in August 2014.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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.7

  1. 1

    Implement the Board-approved quality improvement strategy across safety, experience and outcomes.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  2. 2

    Carry out a patient-safety-week initiative to gather staff feedback on safety concerns and develop work on identified issues.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  3. 3

    Participate in an annual patient-safety week with themed events promoting patient safety as a trust priority.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStatus unclearThe respondent did not make the status of this action clear when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  4. 4

    Disseminate the Wickens investigation learning through patient-safety initiatives and wider staff-learning activity.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  5. 5

    Provide ongoing training to appropriate staff to recognise and immediately report potential serious incidents.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  6. 6

    Operate a regular staff safety forum to discuss serious incidents, share trust-wide learning and refresh safety messages.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 May 2014.
  7. 7

    Remind rotating doctors about the patient-safety agenda and adverse-incident reporting system.

    Stated by St George'S University Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 20 May 2014.

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

Implement the Board-approved quality improvement strategy across safety, experience and outcomes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• We also have a quality improvement strategy (signed off by the Trust Board) which describes, using the three domains of quality (safety, experience and outcomes) how to improve the standards of care and safety for our patients.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Carry out a patient-safety-week initiative to gather staff feedback on safety concerns and develop work on identified issues.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• We are currently carrying out a patient safety week initiative enabling staff feedback on their safety concerns. Themes from this will enable work on the issues identified to demonstrate the trust’s commitment to recognising and acting upon safety issues.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Participate in an annual patient-safety week with themed events promoting patient safety as a trust priority.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Our participation in an annual patient safety week which, through a series of themed daily events, raises awareness and helps to promote a culture where patient safety is seen as a key trust priority.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Disseminate the Wickens investigation learning through patient-safety initiatives and wider staff-learning activity.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As you are aware, the SI investigation highlighted a number of failures and missed opportunities in the care provided to Mr Wickens. The SI investigation and the learning outcomes have since been shared with the immediate teams who had looked after Mr. Wickens and will continue to be disseminated through various patient safety initiatives as described above. You will also be pleased to hear that we now investigate and undertake root cause analysis and disseminate the learning on all cases of hospital acquired thrombosis.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Provide ongoing training to appropriate staff to recognise and immediately report potential serious incidents.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• Ongoing training is being provided to all appropriate staff groups to ensure potential serious incidents are recognised and reported to the Risk team immediately.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Operate a regular staff safety forum to discuss serious incidents, share trust-wide learning and refresh safety messages.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• There is a continuous organisation-wide effort to promote an incident reporting culture as evidenced by a number of initiatives including the establishment of a regular staff safety forum (led by myself, the Chief Nurse and Head of Patient Safety) where serious incidents are discussed to ensure we have trust-wide learning and serve as a useful way of refreshing key safety messages.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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

Remind rotating doctors about the patient-safety agenda and adverse-incident reporting system.

Verbatim wording from the response

“• New doctors on rotation are reminded of the trust’s patient safety agenda and adverse incident reporting system.”

Source location

2014-0234-Response-by-St-Georges-Healthcare-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 20 May 2014

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
1/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026