PFD report

Marjorie GARTSIDE · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 12 Mar 2019•Manchester North

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
7

Described in responses

Recipients and published 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 accurate mobility information during hospital-to-home communication
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable healthcare patient transfer processes
  2. Failure to send prescribed anticipatory medication with the person at discharge
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to ensure patients receive the correct prescribed medication at hospital discharge
  3. Lack of clarity about palliative-care status at discharge
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.4

  1. Action

    Include discharge-learning points in the safety huddle so ward staff are aware of them.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 June 2019.
  2. Action

    Complete a Rapid Review to identify lessons from the incident and support their embedding.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 June 2019.
  3. Action

    Re-circulate the discharge Standard Operating Procedure to staff, including staff on the discharge ward.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 June 2019.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.3

  1. Position

    The discharge was considered safe because equipment was available, observations were stable, and nothing indicated continued hospitalisation was necessary.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustDisputes 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

Failure to provide accurate mobility information during hospital-to-home communication

Wider context from the report

“1. That the information provided by the Royal Oldham Hospital to the Home on 10 October 2018 was inaccurate in suggesting that Mrs Gartside was able to mobilise. Had that information been relied upon by the Home it would have resulted in Mrs Gartside not having suitable or appropriate equipment in place for her return. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable healthcare patient transfer 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 to send prescribed anticipatory medication with the person at discharge

Wider context from the report

“4. That the prescribed anticipatory medication was not sent with Mrs Gartside when she was discharged on 17 October 2018. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure patients receive the correct prescribed medication at hospital discharge.

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 clarity about palliative-care status at discharge

Wider context from the report

“3. There appears to have been no handover of care and a lack of clarity as to whether Mrs Gartside was for palliative care when she was discharged from the Royal Oldham Hospital on 12 October 2018. ”

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 hand over care

Wider context from the report

“3. There appears to have been no handover of care and a lack of clarity as to whether Mrs Gartside was for palliative care when she was discharged from the Royal Oldham Hospital on 12 October 2018. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable handover of care information and responsibility.

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

Discharge processes lacking robustness

Wider context from the report

“2. That Mrs Gartside’s discharge from the Royal Oldham Hospital on 12 October 2018 appears to have been unsafe and raises a concern about the robustness of discharge processes. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable hospital discharge processes.

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

Include discharge-learning points in the safety huddle so ward staff are aware of them.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I apologise to the family of Mrs Gartside that this fell below the expected standard that I would expect to see and would like to reassure them that in order to ensure learning from experience the Divisional Director of Nursing has shared this with response with all the teams to highlight the importance of adhering to the SOP for discharge. In addition, the Divisional Director of Nursing will also include this on the safety huddle to ensure all ward staff are aware of the learning around this very sad death.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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 a Rapid Review to identify lessons from the incident and support their embedding.

Verbatim wording from the response

“A Rapid Review has been completed to ensure all lessons to be learned from this incident have been identified and to ensure the learning can be embedded. In order to address each concern you have raised I have responded to each point below:”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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

Re-circulate the discharge Standard Operating Procedure to staff, including staff on the discharge ward.

Verbatim wording from the response

“On 17 October 2018, Mrs Gartside was prescribed anticipatory medications ‘to take home’ which were dispensed by the pharmacy. She was discharged and arrived back at the home at 3pm. Mrs Gartside did not arrive at the home with the anticipatory medications and unfortunately, her grandson did have to come back to the hospital to collect the anticipatory medication from F9 ward, which is not acceptable. Mrs Gartside should have had her medication sent home with her and in order to ensure that staff members understand the importance of patients getting their medication, the NCME022 Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust Standard Operating Procedure for Discharge from Hospital and Supporting Choice has been re-circulated to all staff: including those on the discharge ward.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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 discharge-learning response with relevant teams and staff to reinforce adherence to discharge procedures.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I apologise to the family of Mrs Gartside that this fell below the expected standard that I would expect to see and would like to reassure them that in order to ensure learning from experience the Divisional Director of Nursing has shared this with response with all the teams to highlight the importance of adhering to the SOP for discharge. In addition, the Divisional Director of Nursing will also include this on the safety huddle to ensure all ward staff are aware of the learning around this very sad death.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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 discharge was considered safe because equipment was available, observations were stable, and nothing indicated continued hospitalisation was necessary.

Verbatim wording from the response

“On review I can confirm that Mrs Gartside’s discharge was delayed until the appropriate equipment was available at the Home to ensure that she was safe on her arrival and this was an appropriate measure. On 12 October 2018 (the day of transfer), Mrs Gartside’s observations were checked, which were stable and two blood sugar readings were taken during the morning. Both of these were within normal range. It is documented that Mrs Gartside was provided with breakfast, however took a minimal amount and was discharged prior to lunch being served. All of the above would indicate that Mrs Gartside was safe for discharge and there was nothing that would suggest she needed to be kept in hospital.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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

A handover communication was documented, with an explicit discharge plan including consideration of palliative registration and ongoing care.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I am sorry that it was perceived in this way during the inquest and most importantly that the family were given cause to concern. On review it is documented on 12 October 2018 that the Handover of Care Communication was completed. On the documentation it states for the GP to consider putting Mrs Gartside on the palliative register, consider Vitamin D and the ongoing need for analgesia and laxatives.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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 mobility information was consistent with documented needs, and suitable equipment was arranged before discharge.

Verbatim wording from the response

“During Mrs Gartside’s first admission, she was documented to have been “mobile with one” (requiring support from one person) and “a frame over short distances with assistance of one”. This was in line with Mrs Gartside’s pre-admission mobilisation needs according to the risk assessment completed by the Residential Home.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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

    Discuss with ward staff the importance of ensuring patients receive adequate hydration and nutrition before discharge.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 14 June 2019.
  2. 2

    Work with the British Red Cross to provide an Enhanced Discharge Service supporting patients who lack support at home.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 14 June 2019.
  3. 3

    Inform involved staff about the retained-cannula incident and remind them to check for cannulas before discharge.

    Stated by Northern Care Alliance NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 14 June 2019.

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

Discuss with ward staff the importance of ensuring patients receive adequate hydration and nutrition before discharge.

Verbatim wording from the response

“However, as part of our review is it recognised that the timing of the discharge could have been improved to ensure that Mrs Gartside had eaten prior to leaving and this will be discussed with the ward staff to reiterate the importance of hydration and nutrient before a patient is due to leave the hospital.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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 the British Red Cross to provide an Enhanced Discharge Service supporting patients who lack support at home.

Verbatim wording from the response

“As a Trust we are working with the British Red Cross to provide an Enhanced Discharge Service for those patients who have a lack of support at home and to assist with people regaining confidence. The Support at Home Service is for those patients who are discharged to their own home and links with other services, for example community connect and mobility services.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 3 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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

Inform involved staff about the retained-cannula incident and remind them to check for cannulas before discharge.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is unacceptable that Mrs Gartside had a cannula in her foot, which was removed by a District Nurse and this is not the standard we expect to see within our hospitals. Please be assured that staff involved have been informed of this incident and reminded to check for cannulas pre discharge. I sincerely apologise for this omission and assure you that this issue has been raised within the division to ensure learning. This response will also be circulated to all staff across the NCA to ensure group learning from experience.”

Source location

2019-0091-Response-by-Northern-Care-Alliance-NHS-Trust
Page 4 · response
Published 14 June 2019

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