PFD report

Irene Joy White · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 7 Nov 2023•Somerset

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
7

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 raised7

  1. Failure to provide TED stockings or similar thromboprophylactic equipment
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to ensure essential clinical equipment and supplies are available and serviceable
  2. Failure to learn from and reflect on DVT-related care to change practice
    Part of recurring concern: Failure to identify and address recurring safety issues through organisational learningPart of recurring concern: Failure to learn from deaths through systematic review
  3. Absence of an active DVT policy
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate thromboprophylaxis for patients at risk of venous thromboembolismPart of recurring concern: Unreliable DVT diagnosis and management
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 provide TED stockings or similar thromboprophylactic equipment

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to ensure essential clinical equipment and supplies are available and serviceable.

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 learn from and reflect on DVT-related care to change practice

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Failure to identify and address recurring safety issues through organisational learning; Failure to learn from deaths through systematic review.

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

Absence of an active DVT policy

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate thromboprophylaxis for patients at risk of venous thromboembolism; Unreliable DVT diagnosis and management.

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 obtain and clarify discharging-hospital information about care needs and thromboprophylaxis

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate thromboprophylaxis for patients at risk of venous thromboembolism; 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

Lack of joined-up clinical leadership and coordination between management and clinical teams

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

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 mobilise immobile residents to minimise DVT risk

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable DVT diagnosis and management.

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 identify and minimise residents’ DVT risk

Wider context from the report

“I am concerned following the evidence presented to the Inquest that: (i) Frome Nursing Home employs clinically trained staff who would have been well aware (or should have been well aware) of the risk of developing DVT in an immobile patient and yet: (a) Did not make any enquiries with the discharging hospital as to her care needs and lack of thromboprophylaxis. Despite appropriate medical/clinical knowledge the Home did not question this and/or take any active steps whatsoever to ascertain Mrs White’s needs or treatment plan; (b) Did not take any steps to acquire any TED stockings, or similar, to minimise the risk of a DVT; (c) Did not take any steps to mobilise Mrs White, over and above repositioning her in bed every four hours, to minimise the risk of a DVT (ii) Frome Nursing Home did not have a DVT Policy in place at the time of Mrs White’s death, and no such active policy was in place at the time of the Inquest and so I am concerned that there has been no active learning and/or meaningful reflection since Mrs White’s death; meaning that practices have not changed and vulnerable residents remain at risk. I am concerned that the Home did not take appropriate and reasonable steps to identify her risk and then take such steps to minimise it. The overwhelming thrust of the evidence presented indicated a poor attitude to a joined-up and cohesive response from the management and clinical teams and this resulted in a lack of clinical leadership, judgment and action being taken. Mrs White lacked capacity due to her cognitive impairment and so was unable to appreciate the risks that immobility posed to her. She was entirely reliant (because of age, cognitive impairment and general infirmity) on the Home to anticipate her risks and needs in this regard. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Unreliable DVT diagnosis and management.

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.