PFD report

Esme Vera Louise Atkinson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 6 Jun 2025•Manchester South

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
10

Raised in this report

Recipients
2

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 2 recipients

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 raised10

  1. Lack of audit of the cardiac component of abnormality scans
    Part of recurring concern: Failure of care and safety auditing to identify deficiencies
  2. Insufficient training of community midwives, health visitors and GPs for early suspicion of heart defects
  3. Failure to ask all appropriate questions during the 6-8 week GP check
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate GP consultation provision for safe patient assessment
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.5

  1. Action

    Develop a briefing with clinical leadership and distribute it through the primary care newsletter to reinforce GPs’ role in early heart-defect identification.

    Stated by NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 18 June 2025.
  2. Action

    Include specific heart-defect content in all student midwives’ NIPE training.

    Stated by NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care BoardStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 18 June 2025.
  3. Action

    Review whether national guidance should require archiving fetal cardiac views from 20-week screening scans.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 18 June 2025.

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

  1. Position

    Whether additional fetal echocardiography is offered depends on individual risk assessment and the treating clinician’s discretion.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareRedirects 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

Lack of audit of the cardiac component of abnormality scans

Wider context from the report

“6. Esme had the usual abnormality scan which the inquest was told did not detect the defect on her heart. The inquest was told that the cardiac part of the abnormality scan was not audited in England under national guidance and the cardiac images were not stored. This meant they were not available for subsequent examination. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure of care and safety auditing to identify deficiencies.

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

Insufficient training of community midwives, health visitors and GPs for early suspicion of heart defects

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard evidence that health visitors /midwives and GPs play a key role in the early identification of a heart defect such as Esme’s at an early stage. Such a defect will rarely be apparent at the 72 hour check on the evidence given at the inquest but symptoms will manifest subsequently. Such symptoms can be subtle and the inquest was told that for there to be early suspicion, of a heart defect, training for community midwives/health visitors and GPs needed to be improved and good quality information sharing was also essential. This should include concerns around feeding and weight loss. ”

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 ask all appropriate questions during the 6-8 week GP check

Wider context from the report

“2. The GP check at 6- 8 weeks was a key checking point but needed to be informed by asking all of the right questions and a good understanding of how to listen for such a heart defect. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate GP consultation provision for safe patient assessment.

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 store cardiac images from abnormality scans

Wider context from the report

“6. Esme had the usual abnormality scan which the inquest was told did not detect the defect on her heart. The inquest was told that the cardiac part of the abnormality scan was not audited in England under national guidance and the cardiac images were not stored. This meant they were not available for subsequent examination. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure diagnostic images are stored and available for safe clinical review.

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 recognise the increased heart-defect risk associated with maternal diabetes when assessing presenting symptoms

Wider context from the report

“3. The inquest was told that it was important that it was understood by health professionals involved in the care of a baby that the mother being diabetic increased the risk of a defect significantly and should increase the care taken in relation to presenting symptoms. ”

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

Insufficient sharing of information about feeding and weight loss concerns

Wider context from the report

“1. The inquest heard evidence that health visitors /midwives and GPs play a key role in the early identification of a heart defect such as Esme’s at an early stage. Such a defect will rarely be apparent at the 72 hour check on the evidence given at the inquest but symptoms will manifest subsequently. Such symptoms can be subtle and the inquest was told that for there to be early suspicion, of a heart defect, training for community midwives/health visitors and GPs needed to be improved and good quality information sharing was also essential. This should include concerns around feeding and weight loss. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to maintain a shared clinical overview of patients' changing 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

Failure to track infant weight centiles in the early stages

Wider context from the report

“7. The evidence of the paediatricians at the inquest was that tracking weight on the centile chart even from an early point assisted in understanding if there was a significant issue in relation to feeding triggering professional curiosity. However the evidence from the Health Visitor appeared to suggest that centile tracking was not seen as useful before 1 month and the red book was not used to look at weight centile tracking in the early stages. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably monitor and interpret infant growth centiles; Failure to reliably monitor patients' weights.

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

Insufficient understanding of how to listen for heart defects during the 6-8 week GP check

Wider context from the report

“2. The GP check at 6- 8 weeks was a key checking point but needed to be informed by asking all of the right questions and a good understanding of how to listen for such a heart defect. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure complete clinical history and examination.

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 routine echocardiogram protocols to account for relevant genetic heart-defect history

Wider context from the report

“5. In Esme’s case although her mum’s identical twin had a heart defect this did not in the North West, trigger the protocol for a routine echocardiogram. A heart defect in her mother would have. It was unclear why this was excluded given the genetic link. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Incomplete cardiovascular risk information for clinical assessment and investigation.

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 routine echocardiograms for babies born to mothers with diabetes

Wider context from the report

“4. There was no routine echocardiogram of a baby born of a mother with diabetes nationally although their risk of a defect was significantly higher than other babies and such a test would detect a baby with a ventricular septal defect at an early stage ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure of echocardiography services to provide timely diagnostic assessment and follow-up.

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 a briefing with clinical leadership and distribute it through the primary care newsletter to reinforce GPs’ role in early heart-defect identification.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS GM is committed to learning from Prevention of Future Death reports. In response to this report, I will initiate the following actions:”

Source location

Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Include specific heart-defect content in all student midwives’ NIPE training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“All of the above guide staff to escalate with any concerns around heart defects. Additionally, the specialist NIPE training does detail specific training around heart defects, and is now included in all student midwives training, historically this was seen as specialist training completed by some midwives.”

Source location

Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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 whether national guidance should require archiving fetal cardiac views from 20-week screening scans.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Your report also flagged that the cardiac part of an abnormality scan is not audited in England under national guidance and cardiac images are not stored, meaning they are not available for subsequent examination. Currently there is no NHS FASP requirement to archive images of the fetal cardiac protocol. We acknowledge your concern and NHS England are currently reviewing this and, if required, will revise current guidance on the storage of cardiac views at the 20-week screening scan.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 4 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Digitalise the red book and progressively add information and functionality to improve access to growth and feeding data.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Once feeding is established, babies should usually be weighed at around 8, 12 and 16 weeks and 1 year at the time of routine immunisations. We recognise that the red book is an important tool for tracking and sharing information between healthcare professionals, and we are digitalising the red book to improve access to this data. Over time, we will add more information and create more functionality, including AI analytics, to ensure the best care is provided for the child, including detecting any anomalies in weight gain or feeding.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 4 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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 updated NIPE handbook to support improved congenital heart disease screening practice, including risk factors, examination and result management.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Postnatally, the NIPE recommends the offer of screening to all babies born in England for conditions relating to the eyes, heart, hips and testes (if applicable).”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 2 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Whether additional fetal echocardiography is offered depends on individual risk assessment and the treating clinician’s discretion.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You raised specific concerns that there is no routine echocardiogram of babies born to a mother with diabetes and that in Esme’s case, although her mum’s identical twin had a heart defect, this did not trigger the protocol for a routine echocardiogram. NHS England encourages all trusts to follow the FASP criteria for offering screening for fetal anomalies. Additional screening for fetal anomalies may include a fetal medicine scan and/or a fetal echocardiogram for patients at higher risk of fetal anomalies for such as maternal diabetes, or having a first degree relative with a congenital heart disease (for example an affected parent or sibling). We agree that additional screening for Esme would have been a reasonable course of action, given the increased risk associated with a genetically identical maternal aunt with a heart defect.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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.5

  1. 1

    Share the report and response through the Provider Oversight Meeting with Stockport NHS Foundation Trust.

    Stated by NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 18 June 2025.
  2. 2

    Share evidence of completion of the stated actions with the coroner.

    Stated by NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 18 June 2025.
  3. 3

    Share the report and response through the Clinical Effectiveness Group for wider system learning.

    Stated by NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care BoardStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 18 June 2025.
  4. 4

    Work with fetal cardiology and congenital heart disease networks to improve detection through practitioner feedback, data, education and training.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 18 June 2025.
  5. 5

    Maintain nationally mandated annual multi-professional training with a staff-attendance compliance benchmark.

    Stated by Department of Health and Social CareStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 18 June 2025.

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

Share the report and response through the Provider Oversight Meeting with Stockport NHS Foundation Trust.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS GM is committed to learning from Prevention of Future Death reports. In response to this report, I will initiate the following actions:”

Source location

Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Share evidence of completion of the stated actions with the coroner.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I will share the evidence of the above actions with you.”

Source location

Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Share the report and response through the Clinical Effectiveness Group for wider system learning.

Verbatim wording from the response

“NHS GM is committed to learning from Prevention of Future Death reports. In response to this report, I will initiate the following actions:”

Source location

Response from Greater Manchester Integrated Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Work with fetal cardiology and congenital heart disease networks to improve detection through practitioner feedback, data, education and training.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You also raised concerns around the fact that the usual abnormality scan did not detect Esme’s heart defect. The diagnosis of ventricular septal defects (VSD) is recognised as difficult on prenatal imaging especially without the use of colour Doppler, which is not a requirement of the cardiac protocol. We agree that this needs to be improved and NHS England is therefore working in collaboration with Fetal Cardiologists, a Congenital Heart Disease Clinical Reference Group, and Congenital Heart Disease Operational Delivery”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 3 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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

Maintain nationally mandated annual multi-professional training with a staff-attendance compliance benchmark.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To support the early identification of conditions, NHS England has put in place nationally-mandated, annual multi-professional training which includes training modules on diabetes in pregnancy, care during labour, the immediate postnatal period (including a focus on infant feeding), and practical simulations to recognise and escalate care for deteriorating mothers or babies. There is a compliance benchmark of >90% staff attendance, providing assurance that key competencies are being routinely reinforced across the workforce.”

Source location

Response from Department of Health and Social Care
Page 2 · response
Published 18 June 2025

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
2/2

Data last updated 7 September 2026