PFD report

ROBERT CHARLES CHANDLER · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 21 Feb 2019•Norfolk

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
8

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
5

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 raised8

  1. Failure of inflatable lifting-chair sections to inflate
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable equipment for ambulance transfer of patients
  2. Failure to use safety straps during patient transfer
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable equipment for ambulance transfer of patientsPart of recurring concern: Unsafe moving and handling of patients
  3. Failure to check equipment daily
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

    Repair the identified faulty Mangar Elk equipment.

    Stated by East of England Ambulance Service NHS TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
  2. Action

    Complete the clinical debrief and use it to reinforce learning about communication with everyone involved.

    Stated by East of England Ambulance Service NHS TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 May 2019.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.5

  1. Position

    Entonox is not indicated for potential chest injuries; administering pain relief would require IV cannulation instead.

    Stated by East of England Ambulance Service NHS 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 of inflatable lifting-chair sections to inflate

Wider context from the report

“(1) The Mangar Elk inflatable chair was intended to be used to lift Mr Chandler to the ambulance. One section did not inflate and so Mr Chandler was lifted underneath his arms and transferred to a chair borrowed from a local supermarket, no pain relief was given to Mr Chandler before being placed into the ambulance. He was later diagnosed with a pneumothorax. No safety straps were used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable equipment for ambulance transfer of patients.

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 use safety straps during patient transfer

Wider context from the report

“(1) The Mangar Elk inflatable chair was intended to be used to lift Mr Chandler to the ambulance. One section did not inflate and so Mr Chandler was lifted underneath his arms and transferred to a chair borrowed from a local supermarket, no pain relief was given to Mr Chandler before being placed into the ambulance. He was later diagnosed with a pneumothorax. No safety straps were used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable equipment for ambulance transfer of patients; Unsafe moving and handling of patients.

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 check equipment daily

Wider context from the report

“(2) Staff are required to ask for assistance when required and are responsible for checking equipment daily. The evidence is that this is not always done. ”

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 provide pain relief before ambulance transfer

Wider context from the report

“(1) The Mangar Elk inflatable chair was intended to be used to lift Mr Chandler to the ambulance. One section did not inflate and so Mr Chandler was lifted underneath his arms and transferred to a chair borrowed from a local supermarket, no pain relief was given to Mr Chandler before being placed into the ambulance. He was later diagnosed with a pneumothorax. No safety straps were used. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to provide timely and adequate pain relief.

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

Inadequate completion of paper incident records

Wider context from the report

“(3) An electronic tablet was used initially to record the incident but this was not sufficiently charged to record all information. Paper records were not adequately completed. ”

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 conduct a clinical debrief after an incident

Wider context from the report

“(4) The incident occurred in September 2018 and the internal investigation report with recommendations was completed in January 2019. Recommendations within the Report and in particular a clinical debrief had not taken place at the time of inquest (February 2019) ”

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 request assistance when required

Wider context from the report

“(2) Staff are required to ask for assistance when required and are responsible for checking equipment daily. The evidence is that this is not always done. ”

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 charging of electronic incident-recording tablets

Wider context from the report

“(3) An electronic tablet was used initially to record the incident but this was not sufficiently charged to record all information. Paper records were not adequately completed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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

Repair the identified faulty Mangar Elk equipment.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You will appreciate that equipment can malfunction at times and we do have a process in place in order to manage these issues. Unfortunately on this occasion the individual did not raise an incident at the time, although I can confirm the equipment was identified as faulty and fixed. I will ensure that further investigation takes place in relation to the clinician’s statement that the equipment malfunction was reported as an incident.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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 the clinical debrief and use it to reinforce learning about communication with everyone involved.

Verbatim wording from the response

“ePCR failure The Trust encourages all staff to complete electronic Patient Care Records however there are times when this is not possible due to the nature of the incident or if there are technology issues. To ensure this does not impact on patient care, the ambulances are all stocked with paper Patient Care Records and a paper record was completed on this occasion. I can assure you this did not impact on the quality of care provided to the patient at that point in time. Unfortunately, the paper record was not completed to the standards the Trust details within the Patient Records Policy and this has already been addressed with the member of staff and formed part of the clinical debrief, which took place on 6th March 2019.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

Entonox is not indicated for potential chest injuries; administering pain relief would require IV cannulation instead.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In terms of your comments regarding pain relief and safety straps, Entonox is not indicated with potential chest injuries so IV cannulation would be needed to administer the drug. The crew felt to do this they would need to take many layers of clothes off the patient in a cold outside area and it was more appropriate to complete when in the ambulance. The Mangar Elk piece of equipment does not have safety straps attached to it as the safety element is managed by the attending ambulance staff.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

Testing Mangar Elk function during daily vehicle checks is considered impracticable because inflation and deflation would delay responses.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Vehicle/equipment daily checks The Trust has a process in place for vehicle/equipment daily checks to take place before the start of every shift. The vehicle daily checklist is completed by the crew and identifies any issues with the equipment on the vehicle. There are some exceptions to this if the crew are required to attend to the call immediately, however the general practice is to complete a vehicle daily check prior to the start of shift. It should also be noted that although a check list would identify that this particular piece of equipment is on the vehicle, it would not be practicable to test the function during this check due to the time taken to both inflate and deflate the device prior to responding to any incidents awaiting attendance”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

Paper Patient Care Records are considered sufficient when electronic records cannot be completed and did not affect patient care on this occasion.

Verbatim wording from the response

“ePCR failure The Trust encourages all staff to complete electronic Patient Care Records however there are times when this is not possible due to the nature of the incident or if there are technology issues. To ensure this does not impact on patient care, the ambulances are all stocked with paper Patient Care Records and a paper record was completed on this occasion. I can assure you this did not impact on the quality of care provided to the patient at that point in time. Unfortunately, the paper record was not completed to the standards the Trust details within the Patient Records Policy and this has already been addressed with the member of staff and formed part of the clinical debrief, which took place on 6th March 2019.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

Annual servicing and the Medical Devices Policy are considered sufficient to manage Mangar Elk faults.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Mangar Elk malfunction The Mangar Elk equipment is used by staff in order to assist patients who have fallen. All devices are serviced on an annual basis in line with the manufacturer guidelines. If a fault is detected then it is managed in line with our Medical Devices Policy and either reported on our incident reporting system or tagged as faulty. It is then assessed by our Clinical Engineering Department and fixed as required.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 1 · response
Published 26 May 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

Safety for Mangar Elk use is considered adequately managed by attending ambulance staff, despite the equipment lacking safety straps.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In terms of your comments regarding pain relief and safety straps, Entonox is not indicated with potential chest injuries so IV cannulation would be needed to administer the drug. The crew felt to do this they would need to take many layers of clothes off the patient in a cold outside area and it was more appropriate to complete when in the ambulance. The Mangar Elk piece of equipment does not have safety straps attached to it as the safety element is managed by the attending ambulance staff.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

    Focus a dedicated team on improving serious-incident investigation quality and monitoring resulting actions.

    Stated by East of England Ambulance Service NHS TrustStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
  2. 2

    Investigate whether the Mangar Elk malfunction was reported as an incident.

    Stated by East of England Ambulance Service NHS TrustStated plannedThe respondent said that this action was planned when they made their response on 26 May 2019.
  3. 3

    Appoint a Patient Safety Integration Lead to embed learning from investigations, concerns and external best practice.

    Stated by East of England Ambulance Service NHS TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 26 May 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

Focus a dedicated team on improving serious-incident investigation quality and monitoring resulting actions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Timeliness of clinical debrief The Trust endeavours to complete all actions arising from Serious Incidents as soon as possible and we currently have a team who are focussing on the quality of incident investigations and also monitoring actions from incidents. The Trust has recently appointed to a Patient Safety Integration Lead in order to better embed learning from both internal investigations or concerns and external best practice. This is in its infancy but will support timely closure of actions from SIs, investigations and patient experiences which we hope will provide assurance that lessons will be learned in a more timely way. The clinical debrief has now taken place and the Area Clinical Lead who supported this advises the crew were very moved by the family’s written statement and learning has taken place around ensuring good communication with everyone.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

Investigate whether the Mangar Elk malfunction was reported as an incident.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You will appreciate that equipment can malfunction at times and we do have a process in place in order to manage these issues. Unfortunately on this occasion the individual did not raise an incident at the time, although I can confirm the equipment was identified as faulty and fixed. I will ensure that further investigation takes place in relation to the clinician’s statement that the equipment malfunction was reported as an incident.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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

Appoint a Patient Safety Integration Lead to embed learning from investigations, concerns and external best practice.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Timeliness of clinical debrief The Trust endeavours to complete all actions arising from Serious Incidents as soon as possible and we currently have a team who are focussing on the quality of incident investigations and also monitoring actions from incidents. The Trust has recently appointed to a Patient Safety Integration Lead in order to better embed learning from both internal investigations or concerns and external best practice. This is in its infancy but will support timely closure of actions from SIs, investigations and patient experiences which we hope will provide assurance that lessons will be learned in a more timely way. The clinical debrief has now taken place and the Area Clinical Lead who supported this advises the crew were very moved by the family’s written statement and learning has taken place around ensuring good communication with everyone.”

Source location

2019-0060-Response-by-East-of-England-Ambulance-Service-NHS-Trust
Page 2 · response
Published 26 May 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