PFD report

Jennifer Susan BIRCH · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 20 May 2026•Nottingham City & Nottinghamshire

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
2

Named on the report

Responses found
4

Of 2 recipients

Stated actions
14

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 quarantine relevant medical equipment promptly after clinical events
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to preserve clinical evidence and data after serious clinical events
  2. Failure to download accurate clinical data from medical devices promptly
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to preserve clinical evidence and data after serious clinical events
  3. Failure to retain relevant clinical material after clinical events
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to preserve clinical evidence and data after serious clinical events
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.11

  1. Action

    Determine how to commission an appropriate penicillin-allergy delabelling service.

    Stated by NHS Derby and Derbyshire Integrated Care Board and NHS Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board and NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 August 2026.
  2. Action

    Develop a stakeholder group to agree the most appropriate pathway for population penicillin-allergy delabelling.

    Stated by NHS Derby and Derbyshire Integrated Care Board and NHS Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board and NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care BoardStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 August 2026.
  3. Action

    Use pharmacy, antimicrobial-stewardship, primary-care and allergy services to develop a local penicillin-allergy delabelling model.

    Stated by NHS Derby and Derbyshire Integrated Care Board and NHS Lincolnshire Integrated Care Board and NHS Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 13 August 2026.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.2

  1. Position

    Responsibility for commissioning penicillin allergy de-labelling services rests with the Integrated Care Board, not the Trust.

    Stated by Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking 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 quarantine relevant medical equipment promptly after clinical events

Wider context from the report

“1. (NUH) Failure to ensure an “inquiring mind” in satisfying the duty of candour The Trust can only seek to learn lessons from events if it has, at every level, an inquiring mind that seeks to capture all relevant evidence at the earliest opportunity following clinical events. My investigation, and that of the PSII, was hampered by the failure of staff to complete a Datix report on the day of the event. This led to a failure to quarantine the medical equipment used in theatre (which was suspected of potential malfunction), a failure to download all accurate clinical data from the machines, and a failure to retain the second, retrospectively completed, anaesthetic chart. This is not an isolated incident, nor one that is unique to this Department. This is a Trust wide issue. Coronial investigations over recent years have been hampered in establishing the truth because of a failure by the Trust to retain relevant material post clinical events (placentas disposed of following neonatal harm – PFD report issued 2021, lost CTG traces, cardiology medical devices not being retained/quarantined/inspected in a timely fashion leading to relevant data being overwritten or devices destroyed – informal letter sent 2026). The Trust must ensure a culture that promotes a forensic inquiring mind, supported by robust systems to promptly identify and retain evidence, especially as a number of the medical devices used across the Trust are not networked or cloud based, meaning data can be lost when the device is switched off or memory is overwritten when the device is next used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to preserve clinical evidence and data after serious clinical events.

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 download accurate clinical data from medical devices promptly

Wider context from the report

“1. (NUH) Failure to ensure an “inquiring mind” in satisfying the duty of candour The Trust can only seek to learn lessons from events if it has, at every level, an inquiring mind that seeks to capture all relevant evidence at the earliest opportunity following clinical events. My investigation, and that of the PSII, was hampered by the failure of staff to complete a Datix report on the day of the event. This led to a failure to quarantine the medical equipment used in theatre (which was suspected of potential malfunction), a failure to download all accurate clinical data from the machines, and a failure to retain the second, retrospectively completed, anaesthetic chart. This is not an isolated incident, nor one that is unique to this Department. This is a Trust wide issue. Coronial investigations over recent years have been hampered in establishing the truth because of a failure by the Trust to retain relevant material post clinical events (placentas disposed of following neonatal harm – PFD report issued 2021, lost CTG traces, cardiology medical devices not being retained/quarantined/inspected in a timely fashion leading to relevant data being overwritten or devices destroyed – informal letter sent 2026). The Trust must ensure a culture that promotes a forensic inquiring mind, supported by robust systems to promptly identify and retain evidence, especially as a number of the medical devices used across the Trust are not networked or cloud based, meaning data can be lost when the device is switched off or memory is overwritten when the device is next used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to preserve clinical evidence and data after serious clinical events.

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 retain relevant clinical material after clinical events

Wider context from the report

“1. (NUH) Failure to ensure an “inquiring mind” in satisfying the duty of candour The Trust can only seek to learn lessons from events if it has, at every level, an inquiring mind that seeks to capture all relevant evidence at the earliest opportunity following clinical events. My investigation, and that of the PSII, was hampered by the failure of staff to complete a Datix report on the day of the event. This led to a failure to quarantine the medical equipment used in theatre (which was suspected of potential malfunction), a failure to download all accurate clinical data from the machines, and a failure to retain the second, retrospectively completed, anaesthetic chart. This is not an isolated incident, nor one that is unique to this Department. This is a Trust wide issue. Coronial investigations over recent years have been hampered in establishing the truth because of a failure by the Trust to retain relevant material post clinical events (placentas disposed of following neonatal harm – PFD report issued 2021, lost CTG traces, cardiology medical devices not being retained/quarantined/inspected in a timely fashion leading to relevant data being overwritten or devices destroyed – informal letter sent 2026). The Trust must ensure a culture that promotes a forensic inquiring mind, supported by robust systems to promptly identify and retain evidence, especially as a number of the medical devices used across the Trust are not networked or cloud based, meaning data can be lost when the device is switched off or memory is overwritten when the device is next used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to preserve clinical evidence and data after serious clinical events.

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

Absence of a penicillin allergy de-labelling pathway at NUH

Wider context from the report

“2. (ICB) Roll out of the Penicillin Allergy De-Labelling Pathway Teicoplanin carries a rare but recognised risk of severe anaphylaxis and reaction occurring in an estimated 0.1-1% of cases. Teicoplanin is often used as an alternative to penicillin for patients who report penicillin allergy. The risk of serious complications is greater in teicoplanin than many other forms of antibiotic (NAP6). It has been described as “an emerging problem in the anaesthetic allergy clinic” (British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2015). Jen was administered teicoplanin in the peri-operative period because the recommended antibiotic for her elective procedure, Flucloxacillin, is from the same antibiotic family as penicillin, and Jen’s medical records reported an allergy to penicillin in the form of a rash as a baby. The use of teicoplanin in this case was entirely appropriate given Jen’s allergy warning, but it did expose her to a risk of severe anaphylaxis, which materialised and caused her death. In the months following Jen’s death, some Trusts have rolled out an inpatient initiative to seek to de-label penicillin allergy from patient medical records where risk stratification determines that the patient does not have a true allergy to penicillin. The SPACE study established that up to 10% of the population carries documented penicillin allergy but over 90% of these are inaccurate. False labels have been shown to increase antibiotic resistance, higher surgical site infections, longer hospital stays, as well as exposing patients to unnecessary complications associated with second-line antibiotics. One local Trust, Doncaster and Bassetlaw NHS Trust, has already rolled out an inpatient PADL pathway. The SPACE study proved it is clinically safe and effective for non-allergy healthcare professionals to use approved risk stratification and direct oral penicillin challenges for low-risk patients, ensuring the burden for this pathway does not impact on the often-small secondary care allergy service. Does the ICB plan to commission this pathway across all local Trusts? At present, NUH does not offer this pathway. ”

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

Failure to complete Datix reports promptly after clinical events

Wider context from the report

“1. (NUH) Failure to ensure an “inquiring mind” in satisfying the duty of candour The Trust can only seek to learn lessons from events if it has, at every level, an inquiring mind that seeks to capture all relevant evidence at the earliest opportunity following clinical events. My investigation, and that of the PSII, was hampered by the failure of staff to complete a Datix report on the day of the event. This led to a failure to quarantine the medical equipment used in theatre (which was suspected of potential malfunction), a failure to download all accurate clinical data from the machines, and a failure to retain the second, retrospectively completed, anaesthetic chart. This is not an isolated incident, nor one that is unique to this Department. This is a Trust wide issue. Coronial investigations over recent years have been hampered in establishing the truth because of a failure by the Trust to retain relevant material post clinical events (placentas disposed of following neonatal harm – PFD report issued 2021, lost CTG traces, cardiology medical devices not being retained/quarantined/inspected in a timely fashion leading to relevant data being overwritten or devices destroyed – informal letter sent 2026). The Trust must ensure a culture that promotes a forensic inquiring mind, supported by robust systems to promptly identify and retain evidence, especially as a number of the medical devices used across the Trust are not networked or cloud based, meaning data can be lost when the device is switched off or memory is overwritten when the device is next used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable reporting of patient-safety incidents.

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

Determine how to commission an appropriate penicillin-allergy delabelling service.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Nottingham and Nottinghamshire Integrated Care Board sincerely apologises to the family of Jennifer Susan Birch for the incredibly sad circumstances surrounding her death. We acknowledge that over 95% of penicillin allergy labels are incorrect leading to the avoidable use of broad spectrum antibiotics, increased antimicrobial resistance, increased mortality and morbidity. As an ICB we are committed to understanding how to commission an appropriate service to challenge incorrect diagnosis of penicillin allergy.”

Source location

Response from ICB
Page 1 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Develop a stakeholder group to agree the most appropriate pathway for population penicillin-allergy delabelling.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Nottingham and Nottinghamshire ICB has begun work on developing a stakeholder group that will meet to discuss the most appropriate pathway to facilitate delabelling in the population. With up to 10% of the population affected, it would not be possible for allergy services alone to facilitate this and there will need to be a focused approach with those at highest risk targeted first.”

Source location

Response from ICB
Page 2 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Use pharmacy, antimicrobial-stewardship, primary-care and allergy services to develop a local penicillin-allergy delabelling model.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Stakeholders To enable a penicillin allergy delabelling program to be embedded effectively across a provider organisation, all key professionals who are essential for its success need to be included and engaged with. We will use existing pharmacy, antimicrobial stewardship teams, primary care and allergy services to develop a model that will work for the population of Nottingham and Nottinghamshire. We hope to be able to provide support to the NHSE program to evidence what works well.”

Source location

Response from ICB
Page 2 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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 interim incident-response messaging and implement a formal communication plan alongside revised policies and SOPs.

Verbatim wording from the response

“v. Communication and Cultural Reinforcement”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 4 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Produce and distribute clinical-area visual aids prompting immediate evidence-preservation actions and sources of support.

Verbatim wording from the response

“iii. Visual Prompts and Frontline Support”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 4 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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 opportunities to reduce reliance on non-networked devices and improve immediate access to device information.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Planned Improvements and Assurance”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 5 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Monitor incident-reporting timeliness and investigate the rationale for reporting delays.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Planned Improvements and Assurance”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 5 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Develop and deliver Trust-wide multiprofessional training on prompt reporting, candour, device quarantine, data preservation and related safety processes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“iv. Training and Workforce Development”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 4 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Audit evidence-retention practices one year after policy launch.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Planned Improvements and Assurance”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 5 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Strengthen incident-reporting, device-quarantine and evidence-retention policies through governance ratification and publication.

Verbatim wording from the response

“i. Strengthening Policy Framework:”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 3 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Develop, approve and disseminate SOPs specifying device security, data preservation, storage, testing and manufacturer engagement after device safety events.

Verbatim wording from the response

“ii. Introduction of new Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs)”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 4 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Responsibility for commissioning penicillin allergy de-labelling services rests with the Integrated Care Board, not the Trust.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust notes that this recommendation was addressed to the Integrated Care Board (ICB). Penicillin Allergy De-labelling services are not currently commissioned within Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire.”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 6 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

The Trust cannot develop penicillin allergy de-labelling services without appropriate commissioning arrangements, workforce capacity and sustainable resourcing.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust notes that this recommendation was addressed to the Integrated Care Board (ICB). Penicillin Allergy De-labelling services are not currently commissioned within Nottingham City and Nottinghamshire.”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 6 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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.3

  1. 1

    Embed individual accountability for clinical-governance engagement through policies, induction, appraisal, revalidation, oversight and professional-management processes.

    Stated by Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 August 2026.
  2. 2

    Establish progress reporting through Patient Safety Group and quality-governance structures, including a digital platform for triangulated safety learning.

    Stated by Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 August 2026.
  3. 3

    Strengthen digital mechanisms for capturing and retaining safety data where possible.

    Stated by Nottingham University Hospitals NHS TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 13 August 2026.

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

Embed individual accountability for clinical-governance engagement through policies, induction, appraisal, revalidation, oversight and professional-management processes.

Verbatim wording from the response

“vi. Clarity of expectation regarding individual professional standards and accountability for engagement with clinical governance in a learning and candour culture.”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 5 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Establish progress reporting through Patient Safety Group and quality-governance structures, including a digital platform for triangulated safety learning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Planned Improvements and Assurance”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 5 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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

Strengthen digital mechanisms for capturing and retaining safety data where possible.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Planned Improvements and Assurance”

Source location

Response from NUH
Page 5 · response
Published 13 August 2026

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
4/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026