PFD report

Christina Lawal · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 28 Nov 2019•Inner North London

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
3

Raised in this report

Recipients
1

Named on the report

Responses found
0

Of 1 recipient

Stated actions
0

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 raised3

  1. Unavailability of cordless telephones for emergency calls
    Part of recurring concern: Unreliable access to emergency communication
  2. Failure of ambulance service callers to recognise further patient deterioration when calling from a different location
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to reliably recognise and respond to acute clinical deterioration
  3. Failure of emergency triage callers to provide correct patient information when not with the patient
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

Unavailability of cordless telephones for emergency calls

Wider context from the report

“1) The care worker had to return to the main office at Duncan Court in order to make a 999 call as there was no cordless telephone available for her use. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable access to emergency communication.

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 ambulance service callers to recognise further patient deterioration when calling from a different location

Wider context from the report

“3) Callers to the ambulance service may not be aware of further deterioration in a patient’s condition if they are calling from a different location. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to reliably recognise and respond to acute clinical deterioration.

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 emergency triage callers to provide correct patient information when not with the patient

Wider context from the report

“2) The emergency triage system used by the London Ambulance Service often involves the caller being asked to give information regarding the patient’s appearance (e.g. do they feel hot, are they sweating or clammy etc). Similarly callers may be asked to put questions to the patient regarding the nature and location pain. A caller may not give the correct information if they are not with the patient at the time of the call. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

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.