Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014

Sally Perrons

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0158, written 9 Apr 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report9 Apr 2014
Reference2014-0158
DeceasedSally Perrons
CoronerHeidi Connor
Coroner areaNottinghamshire
CategoryCommunity health care and emergency services related deaths
Organisation namedEast Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1.  Chief Executive, East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust (“EMAS”) 
2.  Chair and MD, Association of Ambulance Chief Executives (“AACE”) 

1 

CORONER 

I am Heidi Connor, assistant coroner for the coroner area of Nottinghamshire. 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 
and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 6 March 2013 I commenced an investigation into the death of Sally Perrons, DoB 26 
February 1986. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 27 March 
2014.The conclusion of the inquest was a narrative conclusion as follows : 

The cause of Sally Perrons’ collapse on 22 January 2013 was natural.  However, her 
death was contributed to by an unrecognised oesophageal intubation.  East Midlands 
Ambulance Service had not introduced national guidelines published in 2010 regarding 
the use of end tidal carbon dioxide monitoring devices.  Had such a device been 
mandated and used, the oesophageal intubation would have been recognised very 
quickly after it took place. 

The cause of death was :  

1a Pneumonia 
1b Global hypoxic ischaemia of the brain 
1c Cardiac arrest with oesophageal intubation following a non-structural arrthymogenic 
event. 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Sally Perrons worked as a call taker for East Midlands Ambulance. She attended work 
shortly after 0700 hrs on 22 January 2013. Her father, 
, also worked 
there, and was present that day. At 0739 hrs, she left her work station and went to the 
toilet.  Her colleague found her collapsed in the toilet shortly after 0745hrs.  She was 
quickly noted to be in cardiac arrest, CPR was given and an ambulance was called. 

An FRV and ambulance crew arrived at 0755 hrs, and commenced Advanced Life 
Support protocols. Endotracheal intubation was undertaken by a paramedic, 

, at 0800hrs.  No other method of maintaining her airway was attempted before 

intubating. We heard evidence that both 
 and his technician colleague believed 
they saw and heard reassuring signs – ie that the ET tube was in the trachea, and not in 
the oesophagus. End tidal carbon dioxide monitoring was not carried out.  A second 
paramedic checked Ms Perrons after she had been moved to the ambulance.  He too 
gave evidence that he believed he saw and heard signs of correct placement. 

Shortly after arrival at the Emergency Department of the Queen’s Medical Centre in 
Nottingham, at 0824 hrs, doctors treating Sally realised that the ET tube was in the 
oesophagus. This was removed and replaced.  She was admitted to the ICU, but died 
the following day. 

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 We heard evidence regarding the extent of 
points were : 

training to intubate.  The key 

1.  He had been signed off as competent to intubate in early 2009, after carrying 

out 25 whilst supervised in an acute hospital setting.  He described the difficulty 
in getting this training, and the reluctance, as he described it, of hospital 
anaesthetists to assist with it. 

2.  Before Sally’s collapse, he had personally been involved in 14 intubations of 

patients, 7 of which were recorded as successful. 

3.  He had received no refresher training and not been required to carry out 

practice of intubation technique of any sort since being signed off as competent. 

We also heard that it was not until December 2013 that EMAS made use of end tidal 
CO2 monitors mandatory.  We heard in evidence that, after publication of JRCALC 
Guidelines in this respect in 2010, EMAS produced a draft SOP (dated 19 May 2011).   

This SOP states (inter alia) that “intubation is a technique that requires training, 
experience and regular updating to maintain competence and should increasingly be 
considered a secondary option following failure of a supra-glottic airway.”   

The SOP also sets out that end-tidal carbon dioxide monitoring should be used. 

The evidence I heard was that this draft SOP went to the CCG, but was never 
distributed to frontline staff. 

We also heard evidence of a complete lack of consistency in the distribution / 
dissemination of new SOPs, guidelines or bulletins to frontline staff, and no method of 
ensuring staff had read or were even aware of new guidance. 

I made several findings of fact in this case : 

1.  Sally Perrons’ oesophagus was accidentally intubated by paramedics at 

0800hrs on 22 January 2013. 

2.  This was not recognised until she arrived in hospital. 
3.  EMAS failed to adopt and disseminate national guidelines regarding paramedic 
intubation and use of end tidal carbon dioxide monitoring devices, for some 3 
years after the national guidelines were published. 

4.  After 

 was deemed competent to intubate, he then received no 

refresher training before these events, 4 years later. 

I was assisted at this inquest by an independent expert, 
Medical Director of South Central Ambulance Service (Hampshire Division), clinical lead 
for Hampshire & Isle Of Wight Air Ambulance, and Consultant in Anaesthesia and 
, you may be aware, 
Critical Care at Southampton University Hospital.  
is also lead author for the JRCALC resuscitation guidelines, and chaired a recent review 
on paramedic airway management.  
was clear that many of the issues 
identified at this inquest are not restricted to EMAS, but apply to ambulance services 
across England and Wales. 

He also gave evidence that waveform capnography is far more reliable than paper 
detectors. 

5 

CORONER’S CONCERNS 

During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In 
my opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the 
circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.  –  

2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 I am concerned that most of these issues will relate not only to EMAS, but nationally, 
and I therefore address points 1 to 4 below to all ambulance services in England and 
Wales, via AACE.  Point 5 below relates to EMAS only. 

1.  The level of training associated with paramedic intubation – both initial training 
and subsequent refresher training, particularly given how infrequently most 
paramedics are called upon to intubate. 

2.  Whether use of waveform end-tidal carbon dioxide monitors is now mandatory. 
3.  Availability of these devices to staff, and training on how to use and interpret 

4. 

5. 

them. 
In the absence of radical changes, in particular in relation to initial and refresher 
training, ambulance services should consider whether paramedics should be 
permitted to intubate patients at all. 
(In relation to EMAS only) Dissemination of new guidelines/bulletins/SOPs etc to 
frontline staff and ensuring that all relevant employees have read this. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and your 
organisation has the power to take such action.   

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 5 June 2014. I, the coroner, may extend the period. 

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out 
the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed. 

For the avoidance of doubt, I will require a response from EMAS separately, and from 
AACE.  The AACE will need to confirm that they have responses from all ambulance 
services in England and Wales. If necessary, the AACE response may reflect the 
different approaches taken by the various ambulance services. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested 
Persons :  

1.  Sally Perrons’ Next of Kin 
2.  Chair of the UK Ambulance Service National Medical Directors Group, 

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.  

The Chief Coroner may publish either or both in a complete or redacted or summary 
form. He may send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful 
or of interest. You may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your 
response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner. 

9 

9 April 2014                                              HJ Connor 

3

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Association Ambulance Chief Executives (PDF)
Heidi Connor 
Assistant Coroner for Nottinghamshire 
By email 

Association of Ambulance Chief Executives
3rd floor
32 Southwark Bridge Road
London
SE1 8SD

T:  

E:  

27th August 2014 

Ref: Sally Perrons Inquest: Report to Prevent Future Deaths : Response Required by 5 
June 

Dear Mrs Connor, 

Inquest reference the death of Sally Perrons 
Regulation 28 Report- Action to prevent Future Deaths 

Thank you for granting us an extension to Sept 1st to respond in full to the concerns you raised 
following the tragic death of Sally Perrons. I am pleased to advise that I am now in a position to 
appraise you of the actions that the National Ambulance Sector has agreed to take in response to 
those concerns. 

As  you  know  our  work  has  involved  liaising  with  and  canvassing  each  of  the  ten  English 
Ambulance  Trusts  together  with  the  Welsh  Ambulance Service. This work has been facilitated 
by  AACE  but  led  by  the  National  Medical  Directors  Group  (NASMED)  chaired  by 

In  order  to  respond  to  your  concerns  we  undertook  a  comprehensive  survey  of  the  current 
position  of  ambulance  trusts  in  relation  to  intubation  and  capnography.  The  questionnaire  was 
prepared and sent to Medical Directors and Lead Paramedics of Ambulance Services in England 
and  Wales.  It  was  also  sent  to  the  devolved  administrations  of  Scotland,  Northern  Ireland  and 
Republic  of  Ireland  and  replies  were  received  from  them  to  give  a  fuller  overview  of  current 
practice. 

The results of this survey established that there is variation in the training and re-assessment of 
paramedics  in  the  skill  and  practice  of  intubation.  It  found  differences  and  recognised  issues 
around  monitoring  intubation  practice  and  variation  and  availability  of  devices  for  end  tidal 
carbon dioxide monitoring.   

The  results  of  the  survey  were  used  to  discuss  your  concerns  more  comprehensively  in  the 
National  Ambulance  Service  Medical  Directors  Group  and  agree  on  a  number  of  actions  in 
response to your concerns which are detailed below. 

Your concern: 

Point 1:  
The  level  of  training  associated  with  paramedic  intubation  –  both  initial  training 
and  subsequent  refresher  training,  particularly  given  how  infrequently  most 
paramedics are called upon to intubate. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Our actions: 

  Development  of  a  national  recognised  teaching  standard  for  the  stepwise  airway 

management and ventilation.  
This  will  include  airway  positioning,  simple  adjuncts  and  advanced  techniques  which 
include supraglottic devices and paramedic intubation. This standard will describe how a 
paramedic  will  be  initially  trained  and  deemed  competent  to  practice  the  skill  of 
intubation.  
This action to be completed by July 2015.  

  Development  within  all  services  of  a  common  individual  paramedic  skills  log,  which 
will record airway manoeuvres, use of supraglottic airway devices and intubations as a 
minimum. 
This  could  be  further  developed  to  include  a  log  of  cardiac  arrest  management,  major 
trauma  care  and  use  of  other  advanced  interventions  such  as  intraosseous  needle 
placement and chest decompression.  
This action to be completed by July 2015. 

  Annual  re‐assessment  of  the  individual  paramedic’s  advanced  airway  skills  will  be 
based  on  the  airway  log,  taking  into  account  the  number  of  times  advanced  airway 
skills such as intubation were performed and a review of any problems encountered. 
Authority to continue intubation will also be part of the assessment based on whether 
any airway management problems have arisen. 
This action to be completed by July 2016. 

Your concerns: 

Point 2:  
Whether use of waveform end-tidal carbon dioxide monitors is now mandatory. 

Point 3:  
Availability of these devices to staff, and training on how to use and interpret them. 

Our actions: 

  Confirmation of endotracheal tube placement will now include detection of EtCO2 This 
will  be  mandatory  for  every  intubation  with  immediate  effect  and  initially  will  require 
the  use  of  either  a  digital  ETC02  monitoring  device  or  the  use  of  full  waveform 
capnography. Paramedics will not be allowed to intubate patients where this equipment 
is  not  available  to  them  and  will  need  to  manage  the  airway  using  alternative  airway 
adjuncts.  
This action to be completed with immediate effect. 

  The use of waveform capnography will be considered the gold standard but given that it 
will take up to three years time to procure this expensive equipment and train staff in its 
use this objective will take longer to achieve. We are however committed to having all 
this in place on every responding vehicle crewed by a paramedic as soon as is practically 
possible. 
This action to be completed by July 2017. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Your concern: 

Point 4: 
In  the  absence  of  radical  changes,  in  particular  in  relation  to  initial  and  refresher 
training,  ambulance  services  should  consider  whether  paramedics  should  be 
permitted to intubate patients at all. 

  Each individual service will consider whether they continue in the future to teach 

intubation as a core skill or whether to restrict it to specialised and advanced paramedics. 
The survey did establish that two ambulance services have already decided that new 
graduate paramedics will not be practicing intubation in their Trusts.  

I hope that you will agree that we have dealt comprehensively with the concerns that you have 
raised. It has required a great deal of co-ordination between ambulance trusts who have shown 
themselves  to  be  absolutely  committed  to  learning  from  this  tragic  event  and  doing  everything 
within our power to prevent it happening again in the future.  In addition AACE and NASMED 
will  keep  progress  against  these  recommendations  under  regular  review  and  take  appropriate 
action as required to ensure they stay on track. 

Yours sincerely, 

Association of Ambulance Chief Executives

Related reports

Other reports by Heidi Connor

See all →

More reports categorised “Community health care and emergency services related deaths”

See all →

Track East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.