PFD report

Amanda Gibbens · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 23 Feb 2022•Buckinghamshire

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
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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 raised2

  1. Failure to ensure Level 3 constant “within eyesight” observations are conducted by direct visual observation
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to maintain required continuous patient observation
  2. Failure to conduct effective bedroom searches for prohibited self-harm items
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate control of self-harm items in inpatient settingsPart of recurring concern: Unreliable searches and screening for drugs and prohibited items in controlled environments
Responses linked to these concerns

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

No linked response statements

No respondent-stated action or position is clearly linked to these concerns.

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 ensure Level 3 constant “within eyesight” observations are conducted by direct visual observation

Wider context from the report

“1. Using a monitor screen for Level 3 constant “within eyesight” enhanced observations. The jury found in this case that the deceased could not be seen at all times whist in the de-escalation area, because male healthcare staff moved from observing the female patient from their position in the doorway of the de-escalation room, to view via the monitor in the corridor, when the patient moved into the bathroom, to increase her privacy. Although the Observation policy has been updated since this death in July 2020, by the time of the inquest, the use of the monitor for performing L3 observations was not specifically addressed or prohibited. Although the head of nursing was clear that this should no longer be happening in practice, the current Matron of Ruby ward gave evidence that this was still happening, and although it was now being ‘discouraged’, it was not prohibited. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to maintain required continuous patient observation.

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 effective bedroom searches for prohibited self-harm items

Wider context from the report

“2. Searching bedrooms on Ruby ward for prohibited items The evidence in this case demonstrated that the deceased had prohibited items in her bedroom on Ruby Ward, including a ████████ ████████ The search of the patient environment in July 2020 was not effective in identifying and removing items which could be used for self-harm by a detainee patient under the Mental Health Act, who was at risk of self harm. The evidence heard at the time of the inquest in February 2022 was that the bedroom searching process does not always include looking into or underneath a patient’s property in their room for concealed items, although some changes to the method and recording of searches are intended. A previous Report to Prevent Future Deaths to the Trust dated April 2019 also identified that the search process on Ruby ward was not effective. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate control of self-harm items in inpatient settings; Unreliable searches and screening for drugs and prohibited items in controlled environments.

Open source report
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
0/1

Data last updated 7 September 2026

No official response is included in the current published snapshot.