PFD report

Coco Bradford · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 18 Jan 2022•Cornwall and Isles of Scilly

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
5

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
3

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 raised5

  1. Failure to provide for careful reassessment after each IV fluid bolus
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable management of patients’ fluid requirementsPart of recurring concern: Unsafe intravenous fluid management
  2. Lack of guidance for balancing antibiotic and HUS risks in suspected sepsis
    Part of recurring concern: Inconsistent clinical guidance for antibiotic decisions in suspected sepsis
  3. Failure to maintain aligned and current guidance on IV fluid bolus volumes for children presenting with shock
    Part of recurring concern: Unsafe intravenous fluid managementPart of recurring concern: Unsafe updating of clinical policies and guidance
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.2

  1. Action

    Review the 2021 UK Resuscitation Council guideline and consider whether CG84 and related NICE guidance need updating.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 20 January 2022.
  2. Action

    Review relevant NICE guidance for alignment with the 2021 UK Resuscitation Council paediatric advanced life support guidance.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 January 2022.

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

  1. Position

    Balancing antibiotic risks in suspected sepsis is considered clinical judgement and cannot be addressed by a guideline.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.

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 for careful reassessment after each IV fluid bolus

Wider context from the report

“1) In April 2009, NICE published CG 84 on Diarrhoea and Vomiting caused by gastroenteritis in Under 5s and management. Paragraph 1.3.3 deals with IV fluid management for patients presenting with shock. The guidance suggests rehydration with rapid IV infusion at 20mls/kg. The guidance is now a little dated and it is at odds with the Resuscitation Council UK Guidelines issued in 2021 which provide that for children and infants presenting with shock, fluid should be given in boluses of 10mls/kg – there is an emphasis on smaller boluses with careful re-assessment after each bolus to enable early identification of signs and symptoms of fluid overload. This was particularly relevant in Coco’s treatment where there was concern she may develop HUS with associated compromise of kidney function. As there appears now to be a move towards smaller boluses of fluid with more frequent review, it may be that you will also feel it appropriate to reconsider when to escalate care to colleagues in intensive care i.e. whether it should still be after two boluses or after a particular total amount of fluid. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable management of patients’ fluid requirements; Unsafe intravenous fluid management.

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 guidance for balancing antibiotic and HUS risks in suspected sepsis

Wider context from the report

“2) A second issue that came out of Coco’s inquest was the clinical conundrum of how to treat a child with bacterial (e coli 0157) gastroenteritis who is suspected of having a concomitant sepsis. The dilemma is that the administration of antibiotics may precipitate or worsen HUS and, if the child is subsequently found not to have sepsis, may inadvertently cause harm. It may be that you will feel that guidance on how to weigh the balance of risk and who to involve in the decision-making process would be of assistance to clinicians generally. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inconsistent clinical guidance for antibiotic decisions in suspected sepsis.

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 maintain aligned and current guidance on IV fluid bolus volumes for children presenting with shock

Wider context from the report

“1) In April 2009, NICE published CG 84 on Diarrhoea and Vomiting caused by gastroenteritis in Under 5s and management. Paragraph 1.3.3 deals with IV fluid management for patients presenting with shock. The guidance suggests rehydration with rapid IV infusion at 20mls/kg. The guidance is now a little dated and it is at odds with the Resuscitation Council UK Guidelines issued in 2021 which provide that for children and infants presenting with shock, fluid should be given in boluses of 10mls/kg – there is an emphasis on smaller boluses with careful re-assessment after each bolus to enable early identification of signs and symptoms of fluid overload. This was particularly relevant in Coco’s treatment where there was concern she may develop HUS with associated compromise of kidney function. As there appears now to be a move towards smaller boluses of fluid with more frequent review, it may be that you will also feel it appropriate to reconsider when to escalate care to colleagues in intensive care i.e. whether it should still be after two boluses or after a particular total amount of fluid. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe intravenous fluid management; Unsafe updating of clinical policies and guidance.

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 guidance on who to involve in antibiotic decisions for suspected sepsis with possible HUS

Wider context from the report

“2) A second issue that came out of Coco’s inquest was the clinical conundrum of how to treat a child with bacterial (e coli 0157) gastroenteritis who is suspected of having a concomitant sepsis. The dilemma is that the administration of antibiotics may precipitate or worsen HUS and, if the child is subsequently found not to have sepsis, may inadvertently cause harm. It may be that you will feel that guidance on how to weigh the balance of risk and who to involve in the decision-making process would be of assistance to clinicians generally. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inconsistent clinical guidance for antibiotic decisions in suspected sepsis.

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

Unclear escalation thresholds for intensive care during fluid resuscitation

Wider context from the report

“1) In April 2009, NICE published CG 84 on Diarrhoea and Vomiting caused by gastroenteritis in Under 5s and management. Paragraph 1.3.3 deals with IV fluid management for patients presenting with shock. The guidance suggests rehydration with rapid IV infusion at 20mls/kg. The guidance is now a little dated and it is at odds with the Resuscitation Council UK Guidelines issued in 2021 which provide that for children and infants presenting with shock, fluid should be given in boluses of 10mls/kg – there is an emphasis on smaller boluses with careful re-assessment after each bolus to enable early identification of signs and symptoms of fluid overload. This was particularly relevant in Coco’s treatment where there was concern she may develop HUS with associated compromise of kidney function. As there appears now to be a move towards smaller boluses of fluid with more frequent review, it may be that you will also feel it appropriate to reconsider when to escalate care to colleagues in intensive care i.e. whether it should still be after two boluses or after a particular total amount of fluid. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unsafe intravenous fluid management.

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

Review the 2021 UK Resuscitation Council guideline and consider whether CG84 and related NICE guidance need updating.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In light of our initial review, your report has now been forwarded to our guideline surveillance team who will review the UK Resuscitation Council’s 2021 guideline and consider if CG84 and other related NICE guidance need to be updated.”

Source location

2022-0012-Response-from-NICE_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 20 January 2022

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 relevant NICE guidance for alignment with the 2021 UK Resuscitation Council paediatric advanced life support guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your report, which has been reviewed by our internal patient safety team and chief medical officer, states that the NICE guideline on the diagnosis and management of diarrhoea and vomiting caused by gastroenteritis in under 5s [CG84] is not in line with the UK Resuscitation Council’s 2021 guideline on paediatric advanced life support. Having reviewed the guidance, we agree that the volume of fluid bolus does not align and as a result of this being highlighted, we have also looked at our other guidance of relevance.”

Source location

2022-0012-Response-from-NICE_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 20 January 2022

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

Balancing antibiotic risks in suspected sepsis is considered clinical judgement and cannot be addressed by a guideline.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Finally, you also note the difficulty of treating a child with bacterial gastroenteritis who is suspected to have concomitant sepsis and ask if guidance on ‘how to weigh the balance of risk and who to involve in the decision-making process’ would be useful. Reflecting on the specific issue raised in your report, that ‘the administration of antibiotics may precipitate or worsen [haemolytic uraemic syndrome]’ and, if the child is subsequently found not to have sepsis, may inadvertently cause harm’, we consider this to be a matter of clinical judgement and not something that could be addressed by a guideline. Haemolytic uraemic syndrome is”

Source location

2022-0012-Response-from-NICE_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 20 January 2022

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.1

  1. 1

    Forward the report to the guideline surveillance team for further consideration.

    Stated by National Institute for Health and Care ExcellenceStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 20 January 2022.

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

Forward the report to the guideline surveillance team for further consideration.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In light of our initial review, your report has now been forwarded to our guideline surveillance team who will review the UK Resuscitation Council’s 2021 guideline and consider if CG84 and other related NICE guidance need to be updated.”

Source location

2022-0012-Response-from-NICE_Published
Page 1 · response
Published 20 January 2022

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