PFD report

Thomas William Pearson · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 4 Jul 2016•South Yorkshire (Eastern)

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
1

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
2

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 raised1

  1. Use of fluticasone in patients without a raised eosinophil count carrying pneumonia risk without benefit
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

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

  1. Position

    A usable local guideline on inhaled corticosteroid withdrawal cannot currently be produced because the evidence and clinical knowledge remain unclear.

    Stated by Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant 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

Use of fluticasone in patients without a raised eosinophil count carrying pneumonia risk without benefit

Wider context from the report

“(4) Dr T Rogers (Consultant Respiratory Physician), who gave evidence at the inquest, confirmed that fluticasone causes a reduction in the body's defence mechanisms and, as a result, carries with it an increased risk (estimated at 1.7 fold) increase in the risk of the patient developing pneumonia. (5) For a proportion of patients, the increased risk of developing pneumonia may be justified by the benefits that the use of fluticasone brings. However, Dr Rogers also stated that, for the majority of patients, namely those without a raised eosinophil count (a group which included Mr Pearson), fluticasone, whilst still carrying an increased risk of the development of pneumonia, would bring no benefits. (6) In response to an enquiry put to him, Dr Rogers agreed that it would be helpful for the use of inhaled steroids (in particular fluticasone) to be reviewed. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

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 usable local guideline on inhaled corticosteroid withdrawal cannot currently be produced because the evidence and clinical knowledge remain unclear.

Verbatim wording from the response

“To summarise the position therefore I am advised that the respiratory team is well versed with the current state of the evidence and are following appropriate current guidelines from learned societies. I have been reassured that the respiratory team work collaboratively in cohesive generic teams and a variety of topics are regularly discussed. At this point the team are unable to produce a useable local guideline given the current state of knowledge other than to be aware that possible options must be discussed with the patient while acknowledging that the evidence for withdrawal of inhaled corticosteroid currently remains unclear.”

Source location

2016-0246-Response-by-Doncaster-and-Bassetlaw-Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 4 July 2016

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 eosinophil count cannot currently be recommended to identify patients suitable for inhaled corticosteroid withdrawal because its validity lacks consensus.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is accepted that there is a risk of patients having exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease should inhaled corticosteroids be withdrawn and some of these exacerbations can be very significant. I understand that it has been suggested that a normal eosinophil count may identify a subset of patients who will not deteriorate on withdrawal. However I am advised by the respiratory team that there is no agreed consensus or international agreement on the validity of this assessment. On that basis therefore the eosinophil count cannot currently be recommended as a clinical tool to use in order to identify patients whose inhaled corticosteroids can be withdrawn.”

Source location

2016-0246-Response-by-Doncaster-and-Bassetlaw-Hospitals
Page 3 · response
Published 4 July 2016

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

Following current national and international inhaled corticosteroid guidelines is considered an adequate response to concerns about prescribing and pneumonia risk.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is important to stress that the international respiratory clinical and academic body still do not have a unified view on the matter. The national and international guidelines still recommend the use of inhaled corticosteroids in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (NICE 2010 (CG101), NICE Quality Standard (QS10) updated February 2016 and international guidelines – GOLD – Global Strategy for Diagnosis Management and Prevention of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 2016. These acknowledge increased risk of pneumonia and the respiratory community within Doncaster is well aware of this. However it has been pointed out that whilst there is an increase in the incidence of pneumonia in patients using inhaled corticosteroids this is likely to be non-severe and non-fatal.”

Source location

2016-0246-Response-by-Doncaster-and-Bassetlaw-Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 4 July 2016

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.2

  1. 1

    Delivered a presentation on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management to support clinical understanding of relevant treatment issues.

    Stated by Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 July 2016.
  2. 2

    Discussed inhaled corticosteroid use and associated risks within the Trust’s respiratory team.

    Stated by Doncaster and Bassetlaw Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 4 July 2016.

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

Delivered a presentation on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease management to support clinical understanding of relevant treatment issues.

Verbatim wording from the response

“████████ confirmed there has been a debate within the respiratory team at Doncaster and Bassetlaw NHS Trust regarding the matter. He advises that the wider respiratory community is aware of the ongoing international debate over the role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The discussions took place between the respiratory physicians within the Trust since the inquest. Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the subject of a presentation in June 2015 prior to the conclusion of the inquest.”

Source location

2016-0246-Response-by-Doncaster-and-Bassetlaw-Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 4 July 2016

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

Discussed inhaled corticosteroid use and associated risks within the Trust’s respiratory team.

Verbatim wording from the response

“████████ confirmed there has been a debate within the respiratory team at Doncaster and Bassetlaw NHS Trust regarding the matter. He advises that the wider respiratory community is aware of the ongoing international debate over the role of inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The discussions took place between the respiratory physicians within the Trust since the inquest. Management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was the subject of a presentation in June 2015 prior to the conclusion of the inquest.”

Source location

2016-0246-Response-by-Doncaster-and-Bassetlaw-Hospitals
Page 2 · response
Published 4 July 2016

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