Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014

Else Harvey-Samuel

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0278, written 20 Jun 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report20 Jun 2014
Reference2014-0278
DeceasedElse Harvey-Samuel
CoronerPeter Dean
Coroner areaSuffolk
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses publishednone published

The report

Text recovered by OCR from a scanned PDF. OCR is imperfect: check anything you rely on against the source PDF. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1. The Medical Director, West Suffolk Hospital

CORONER

1 am Dr Peter Dean, senior coroner for the coroner area of Suffolk

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS

| 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.

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On the 25" of February 2013 | commenced an investigation into the death of Else
Merete-Harvey Samuel, aged 89. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest
on the 21" of May 2014. The conclusion of the inquest was that Mrs Harvey-Samuels
‘Died from complications following a fall and pelvic fracture, contributed to by significant
pre-existing natural disease.’ The cause of death was found to be 1a
Bronchopneumonia, Bone marrow and fat embolism and anaemia due to 1b Fall with
pelvic fracture and haematoma, with contributory causes of Recent organising
myocardial infarction and Coronary artery atherosclerosis. There were matters that
became evident which gave cause for concern.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

Mrs Harvey-Samuel was admitted to the West Suffolk Hospital on the 15" of February
2013 following a fall at her residential home which resulted in groin pain, and the
possibility of a hip or pelvic fracture was considered by the GP who referred her to
hospital. Radiographs at that time did not reveal any fractures. Mrs Harvey-Samuel’s
condition was complicated by other medical issues and pain control remained a
problem. Repeat radiographs were requested out of hours because of continuing
problems but the radiographer questioned the request and some views were not
repeated, including the pelvis. The clinical history accompanying the request had not
given the whole picture and the expected communication between senior clinician and
radiologist, after the radiologist declined to do some views, did not occur. Following Mrs
Harvey-Samuel’s subsequent death a pelvic fracture was found at post mortem, along
with significant natural disease. A clinical incident was raised and investigated following
the x-ray problems but this did not answer all of the issues raised by the incident. While
it is accepted that there would have been no active management had the existence of
the pelvic fracture been established in life, and the tragic outcome was still likely to have
occurred, an accurate diagnosis would have assisted the clinical management greatly
and, without attention to the issues raised by this very sad situation, there remains a risk
of other fatalities occurring if accompanying clinical histories are not complete and
potentially significant radiographs are not taken as a result.

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. —

(1) Doctors requesting radiographs or other imaging investigations (whether out of hours
or not) must include sufficient clinical information to explain why the investigation is

indicated to avoid the request being rejected, and also to inform the radiologist who
reports on the subsequent images what the relevant clinical history was.

(2) In the event of further need for justification of an out of hours investigation,
discussion between senior clinician and senior radiologist should take place and be
documented.

(3) In any post untoward incident investigation, the system for determining the correct
level of post event analysis, and the investigation itself, must be sufficiently robust to
establish fully what occurred and to take any statements required as near to the time of
the event as possible so as to identify any lessons that need to be learned.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe you have the
power to take such action.

x]

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by the 15" of August, 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.

COPIES and PUBLICATION

| have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and Mrs Harvey-Samuel’s family.

| 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.

20-6-14 ) é ) Dr Peter Dean

Related reports

Other reports by Peter Dean

See all →

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths, 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.