Glenys Pollitt · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 7 Sep 2017•Manchester South

Published report and response evidence

This report’s concerns and statements found in recipients’ published responses. Statements are included even where no link to an individual concern is recorded. A link shows an evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
4

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

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 raised4

  1. Unclear process for escalation to consultant level and critical care
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable escalation policy for care concerns
  2. Lack of an ongoing programme for reinforcing clinical lessons
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to identify and address recurring safety issues through organisational learning
  3. Inconsistent use of high-resolution screens for viewing x-rays
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable chest X-ray imaging and interpretation

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

  1. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust

    Develop an implementation plan for rolling out the National Early Warning System independently of the delayed electronic patient record launch.

  2. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust

    Use the case in future training programmes for junior clinical staff in Emergency Department and Acute Medicine.

  3. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust

    Complete morbidity and mortality discussions in Emergency Department and Acute Medicine to share and learn from the case.

  4. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust

    Draft guidance identifying high-resolution screens, access arrangements and support across the Trust.

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

  1. Stockport NHS Foundation Trust

    Standard Emergency Department screens are sufficiently high resolution, and screen resolution was not identified as affecting diagnosis.

    Disputes the concernThe respondent disagreed with part of the concern or the basis for it.

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 process for escalation to consultant level and critical care

Wider context from the report

“3. The process for escalation to consultant level and critical care was unclear. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable escalation policy for care concerns.

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 an ongoing programme for reinforcing clinical lessons

Wider context from the report

“2. At the inquest, the evidence given was that the clinicians had seen what they expected to see on the x ray rather than seeing the whole picture shown on the x ray. It was unclear what ongoing programme was in place for reinforcing the lessons learnt from this case amongst clinicians; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to identify and address recurring safety issues through organisational learning.

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

Inconsistent use of high-resolution screens for viewing x-rays

Wider context from the report

“1. It was accepted during the evidence that the x ray should ideally be viewed on a high-resolution screen rather than an standard screen. This increased the likelihood of significant abnormalities being detected. There are a number of such high-resolution screens for viewing of x rays. The evidence indicated that there was differing practice across the hospital as to when such screens were used and by whom. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable chest X-ray imaging and interpretation.

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 assess the whole x-ray image rather than only expected findings

Wider context from the report

“2. At the inquest, the evidence given was that the clinicians had seen what they expected to see on the x ray rather than seeing the whole picture shown on the x ray. It was unclear what ongoing programme was in place for reinforcing the lessons learnt from this case amongst clinicians; ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable chest X-ray imaging and interpretation.

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

Develop an implementation plan for rolling out the National Early Warning System independently of the delayed electronic patient record launch.

Verbatim wording from the response

“During the inquest the patient’s daughter asked why the Trust used the EWS pathway not the National Early Warning System (NEWS) as she believed the patient would have been escalated to the critical care team sooner based on the NEWS pathway. The evidence given in response was that though we were not using NEWS we had intended to change to it from 30/09/2017 when our new electronic patient record (ePR) was launched. Unfortunately this launch has been delayed and we do not have a definitive new launch date. Therefore our Assistant Director of Nursing, who has been tasked with rolling out NEWS across the Trust, is currently working up an implementation plan that is not reliant on the launch of our ePR.”

Source location

2017-0228-Response-by-Stockport-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 6 October 2017

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 the case in future training programmes for junior clinical staff in Emergency Department and Acute Medicine.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Both departments have confirmed that they intend to use this case for future training of junior clinical staff in their ongoing training programmes.”

Source location

2017-0228-Response-by-Stockport-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 6 October 2017

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 morbidity and mortality discussions in Emergency Department and Acute Medicine to share and learn from the case.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Both the Emergency Department team and the Acute Medicine team have completed morbidity & mortality discussions regarding this case – completed on 15/02/2017 and 24/05/2017 respectively. These are perfect opportunities for cases to be shared with clinicians across all grades to review and learn from a case.”

Source location

2017-0228-Response-by-Stockport-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 6 October 2017

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

Draft guidance identifying high-resolution screens, access arrangements and support across the Trust.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust’s Radiology Systems Manager has confirmed that the standard screens available in ED are of a high enough resolution to view chest x ray images. The Radiology Systems Manager has drafted a document, which is awaiting their Business Group Quality Governance Board sign off, to list where all high resolution screens are within the Trust, how to access them and how to gain support to view images on them, should it be required.”

Source location

2017-0228-Response-by-Stockport-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 6 October 2017

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

Standard Emergency Department screens are sufficiently high resolution, and screen resolution was not identified as affecting diagnosis.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Trust’s Radiology Systems Manager has confirmed that the standard screens available in ED are of a high enough resolution to view chest x ray images. The Radiology Systems Manager has drafted a document, which is awaiting their Business Group Quality Governance Board sign off, to list where all high resolution screens are within the Trust, how to access them and how to gain support to view images on them, should it be required.”

Source location

2017-0228-Response-by-Stockport-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 6 October 2017

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