Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014

George Werb

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0510, written 19 Nov 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report19 Nov 2014
Reference2014-0510
DeceasedGeorge Werb
CoronerLydia Brown
Coroner areaExeter & Greater Devon
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

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 (1)

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

4. Devon Clinical Commissioning Group
2. NHS England

4 | CORONER

| am Lydia Brown assistant coroner, for the coroner area of County of Devon (Exeter
and Devon Greater District)

2. | GORONER’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.

3 | INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On 26" August 2013 | commenced an investigation into the death of George Christian
Werb aged 15. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 8" October
2014. The conclusion of the inquest was a Narrative Verdict : George died on 28 June
2013 on the railway track at Seaton Station, Seaton, Devon. At that time he was on
home leave from inpatient care in a child psychiatric unit. Before he went on leave he
was assessed as having no suicidal risk but the information used in this assessment
was incomplete inaccurate and did not reflect the actual situation. Poor engagement
with the family, placing him in a unit a long distance from home, absent note keeping
and inadequate internal communications all contributed to this outcome.

4 | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

George Christian Werb was receiving treatment for serious Mental Health issues,
including a probable diagnosis of psychosis and depression, and was detained under
Section 3 of the Mental Health Act and admitted to the Priory Hospital, Southampton 23
May 2014 for treatment. This was the nearest unit available for a child with George’s
needs, notwithstanding this was more than a 2 hour drive away from the home address,
and friend and family support. George continued to receive treatment for a number of
weeks, then the Section was lifted, and periods of home leave were commenced.

The second of these periods of home leave commenced on 27'" June 2014,
notwithstanding that the situation had not been effectively risk assessed.
Communication with the family was poor and due to the distance between the treating
hospital and home address. No family therapy had been undertaken and the family had
not received appropriate and full information of their son's diagnosis and the risk of
suicide had not been adequately considered before leave was allowed.

George walked onto a railway track near his home the morning after his home leave
commenced and died when he was hit by an express train.

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) The community team had to spend much time making numerous telephone calls
to locate a child psychiatric bed. There was not at the time, and still appears to
be no, or no effective bed bureau system to identify spaces. This is wasteful of
Clinician time, creates inevitable delays and is indicative that there are routinely
too few available beds to serve the needs of our child psychiatric patients.

On a previous admission during May 2014 the bed located was in Huntercombe,

and George was removed by his father as the bedroom had inadequate

furniture, had no bed linen and there was concern the environment was adding
to George’s distress. The distance between home and this placement was in
excess of 3 hours travel time.

(3) On the index admission, George was placed in the Priory Hospital,
Southampton, a distance of over 2 hours travelling time from home. This is not
an NHS facility and is specifically for “overflow” patients from all across England,
many of whom are therefore huge distances from their home, their family, their
friends and community support.

(4) Due to the distance, the hospital made the decision that family therapy could not
take place (although the parents would have engaged if the importance of this
was explained) and periods of home leave were extended due to travelling
times, rather than in response to clinical need.

(5) There was poor attendance at the CPA meeting, and both parents and the
community team only “attended” by telephone, which was far from ideal and
impacted on the effectiveness of communication between all parties.

(6) Having local accessibility where in patient care is required was recognized in the

Mental Health Crisis Care Concordat published 18 February 2014 to be

important to keep the young person close to home, school and friends and this

was also recognized by all the clinicians at inquest to be important and
necessary. With current provision of beds this need is not being met, and is
impacting on patient care.

In this case | consider the distance of the unit directly contributed to the

circumstances that led to George’s death.

(2

3

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

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

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by 23™ December 2014. |, 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 ee to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested
Persons, and to the LOCAL SAFEGUARDING BOARD as George
was under 18.

| have also sent it to
Norman Lamb, Minister of State, Department of Health

a:
who may tind tt useful or of interest.

| 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:

“|
“4

19 November 2014 Signe” 2. Mire ees eeeeeeeeneneeeenene

Lydia Charlotte Brown
HM Assistant Coroner
Room 226

County Hall

Topsham Road
EXETER

Devon

EX2 4QD

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 NHS England (PDF)
England

Bruce Keogh

Medical Directorate

6" Floor, Skipton House
80 London Road

SE1 6LH

Lydia C Brown 3 March 2015
Exeter and Greater Devon Coroner's Office

Room 226 ;

Devon County Hall

Topsham Road
Exeter

EX2 4QD

Dear Ms Brown,

Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths following the inquest of George
Werb who died.

We are writing to you to respond to the concerns raised by your investigation into the
circumstances surrounding the tragic death of George Werb.

NHS England and Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group
(NEW Devon CCG) takes very'seriously its responsibility to act upon what it learns from
deaths of young people in receipt of services commissioned by us.

Responsibilities and commissioning arrangement across Child and Adolescent Mental
Services (CAMHS) is complex and much has changed since George was in receipt of
these services. Throughout our response we will provide the required clarification and
‘details of improvements relating to the areas of concern you have raised.

CAMHS is delivered within a 4 tier framework and since April 2013 the Commissioning
Framework for CAMHS is as follows:-

Tier 1 (Universal services)

These are services whose primary remit is not that of providing a mental health service,
but as part of their duties, they are involved in both assessing and/or supporting children
and young people who have mental health problems. Universal services include GPs,
health visitors, schools, early years’ provision and others. Universal services are
commissioned by CCGs and Local Authorities and schools themselves, and may be
provided by a range of agencies.

Tier 2 (Targeted services) : .

These include services for children and young people with milder problems which may
be delivered by professionals who are. based in schools or in children’s centres.
Targeted services also include those provided to specific groups of children and young
people who are at increased risk of developing mental health problems e.g. youth
offending teams and looked after children’s teams, paediatric psychologists based in
acute. care settings. Targeted services are commissioned by CCGs and Local
Authorities and schools, and are provided by a range of agencies. Arrangements vary
High quality care for all, now and for future generations

across the country and according to the nature of the service.

Tier 3 (Specialist services)

These are multi-disciplinary teams of child and adolescent mental health professionals
providing a range of interventions. Access to the team is often via referral from a GP, but
referrals may also be accepted from schools and other agencies, and in some cases
self-referral. These services are commissioned by CCGs although there may be a
contribution from Loca! Authorities. The latter varies across the country.

Tier 4 (Specialised CAMHS)

These include day and inpatient services and some highly specialist outpatient services

including. services for children/young people with gender dysphoria, CAMHS for children

and young people who are: deaf, highly specialised autism spectrum disorder (ASD)
’ services, and highly specialised obsessive compulsive disorder services. These services

have, since April 2013, been commissioned directly by NHS England.

Concern 1

The community team had to spend much time making numerous telephone calls
to locate a child psychiatric bed. There was not at that time, and still appears to
no, or no effective bed bureau system to identify spaces. This is wasteful of
clinician time, creates inevitable delays and is indicative that there are routinely
too few available beds to serve the needs of our young psychiatric patients

Since August 2013, NHS England has implemented a situation report (SITREP) process
each Friday which requires all Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS)
inpatient providers to submit numbers of available beds to a national database. This data
is Used to produce a report that is available from lunch time on a Friday indicating
available capacity at each of the inpatient services commissioned. . The report is
circulated via the Area Teams to all Tier 3/Community CAMHS so. they can identify
capacity as required and particularly on a Friday when there is often a peak in demand
and over the weekend. In parallel, there is a national Friday teleconference which is
attended by all the CAMHS case managers from the ten Area Teams, where capacity is
discussed in detail and also provides an opportunity for individual case managers io gain
support from colleagues in other areas to identify suitable placements. From this
teleconference, a detailed report is circulated to all Area Teams, providing details of
capacity available as well as other key information for example Staffing issues that may
prevent a unit from admitting. Again, this report is used to support timely identification
of available capacity by case managers and community teams.

NHS England has ‘conducted two separate processes during 2014 to identify and
commission additional inpatient general CAMHS and psychiatric intensive care capacity.
from existing providers that should result in an additional 50 beds nationally by the end
of the financial year. This includes additional capacity in the South West area.

All ten NHS England Area Teams have recruited CAMHS case managers who have
been instrumental in supporting timely and appropriate access to commissioned beds.
The case managers work closely with providers and the community CAMHS teams to
ensure timely discharge and to address barriers that may cause delays to those plans.

_ Concern 2

On a previous admission in May 2013 the bed located was in Huntercombe, and
George was removed by his father as the bedroom had inadequate furniture, had
no bed linen and there was a concern the environment was adding to George’s

High quality care for all, now and for future generations

distress. The distance between home and this placement was in excess of 3 hours
travel time.

The NHS England Area Team Bristol, North Somerset,.Somerset, South Gloucester
(BNSSSG) _ has no record of the prior approval for admission into the Priory Hospital.
The young person’s admission was just after NHS England was established. The
current processes for approval to admit were not being followed by all community teams
and admission may well have taken place without the Area Team’s knowledge. This
process has since been rectified and is now part of robust process of assessment and
admission. In respect of bed availability, there was at that time a shortage within the
South West region due to the temporary closure of Wessex House, Bridgewater,
Somerset. Following concerns regarding poor staffing levels and a number of significant
incidents, it was decided that the unit was no longer viable to operate safely. This
temporary closure remained in place for nearly two years. Finding a bed is the
responsibility of the referring community CAMHS team and they would have contacted
available units and taken the bed that was made available:to them. Whilst every effort is
made to keep patients/children and young people as close to home as possible,
sometimes lack of available beds mean that this cannot always happen.

Concern 3 &6

On the index admission George was placed in the Priory Hospital, Southampton, 'a
distance of over 2 hours travelling time from home. This is not an NHS facility and
is specifically for ‘overflow’ patients from across all England, many of whom are
therefore huge distances from their home, their family, their friend and community
support.

Having local accessibility where inpatient care is required was recognised in the
Mental Health Crisis Care Concordat published 18 February 2014 to be important
to keep the young person close to home, school and friends and this was also
recognised by all the clinicians at the inquest to be important and necessary, With
current position of beds this is not being met, and is impacting on patient care

‘With regards to Priory Hospital Southampton, this is not an overflow facility but is
commissioned by NHS:England to provide twelve general CAMHS beds and is one of a
number of Priory Hospital sites throughout England providing CAMHS beds.

The South West region can now also report that Wessex House, Bridgewater, Somerset
is now in the process of a phased reopening. There are currently four generic beds
open, with a further four opening during January 2015 and the full twelve bed
compliment will be open by March 2015. In addition there has been a further six generic
beds and four Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit (PiCU) beds commissioned from the
Huntercombe Group with a unit now based in Torquay, Devon. Again this unit has a
phased opening plan, with four generic beds currently open, a further two will, open
during January 2015 and the PiCU beds will be available by the end of January 2015. In
total this will give the South West a total of fifty two generic beds and four PiCU beds.

Concern 4 and 5

Due to the distance, the hospital made the decision that family therapy could not -

take place (although the parents would have engaged had the importance of this

was explained) and the periods of home leave were extended due to travelling

times rather than in response to clinical need.

There was poor attendance at the CPA meeting, and both parents and the
community team only ‘attended by telephone, which was. far from ideal and
impacted on the effectiveness of communication between all parties.

The opening of Tier four CAMHS beds in Wessex House, Bridgewater, Somerset and in

High quality care for all, now and for future generations

Torbay will reduce the need for children to be placed at a distance from their home
unless there are specific clinical indications for this. This allow for improved
communication and joint planning between the tier four providers, local practitioners and
families face to face.

It is also likely that the issue of communication between placement providers and local
CAMHS will be addressed in the Devon Safeguarding Children Board (DSCB) Serious
Case Review (SCR) that looks into the circumstances leading up to the death of George
and which is yet to be published. Health agencies involved in the SCR have been as
follows:

® NHS England
e Tier 4 providers
e Local CAMHS
_ ® Integrated Children Services
e NEW Devon CCG
e® Primary Care

Once the SCR is published there will be a programme developed to disseminate the
lessons learnt and embed such learning in practice.

Concern 7

In. this case | consider the distance of the unit directly contributed to the
circumstances that led to George’s death.

In response to this unfortunate incident, the Priory Group conducted a detailed internal
review. This was led by a team of experts from other parts of the Priory Group and
overseen by NHS England as commissioners of the service. Southampton Priory put in
place an action plan which went beyond the report in terms of actions identified. This
was developed in response to the NHS England feedback, and the actions were
monitored through contract monitoring meetings until completed.

The review report highlighted issues that could have contributed to the death of George
Werb although it could not say conclusively that his suicide would not have happened in
the absence of.these issues. Many of these contributory factors are highlighted in the
regulation 28 report, namely gaps in information used in risk assessments and clinical
records and internal communications. It is our view that, regardless of the issues related
to distance from home and families as reflected above, these are themes that contribute
to similar incidents across mental health providers. Key developments. from the action
plan to ensure the safety of other patients included:

« A full review of the process from the point of enquiry to discharge, updating all
relevant protocols. This included developing processes to ensure all relevant
background information is requested and provided, including information on
previous admissions. Training in these updated process was provided for staff
with role play and scenarios

* A process was put in place to review CPA dates weekly to ensure first CPA
meetings are being held within 14 days of admission. This enforces the principal
whereby all patients commence discharge planning at the point of admission.

« Weekly audits introduced to. ensure that risk assessments are clearly
documented prior to and upon return from leave. . In addition to the risk
assessment, all patients now have an individual session with a member of the
team upon return from leave to allow the opportunity to discuss their leave.

High quality care for all, now and for future generations

e Quality Walk Rounds have- been further developed to ensure that risk
assessments are clear and include explanation of conflicting information, and
that when observation levels are reduced there is a clear clinical rationale
included.

e Handover templates have been amended to ensure that any expression of
suicidal ideation is reported to the nurse in charge and communication of this
evidenced in the clinical records. A section on key risks in the past week has
been added. .

e The observation policy was updated and a process established to follow up any
gaps in recording of observations and the patients mental state.

e Refresher training was provided for staff on care planning, with a focus on
ensuring care plans are developed with the young persons and their carer/family;
and that these are reviewed-and updated. When they are developed without
them, the reason is for this is now clearly documented. The Chair of the CPA
has a clear and understood key role in ensuring that patient and family voice is
heard and recorded in the minutes.

e A full review of the therapy programme was completed to demonstrate that it is
aligned to the evidence base, QNIC standards and the Tier 4 NHS contract
requirements and ensures there is sufficient provision of appropriate therapy for
young people. The procedure for referral to therapy was reviewed,
communicated and audited.

e The Hospital Director had a forum with staff regarding communication and
lessons learned from this incident overall especially with regards communication.
These forums were also used to promote the reporting culture and ensure all
clinical incidents are reported as well as being recorded in notes.

e The Quality Walk Round for documentation.was temporarily increased to weekly
to ensure that all staff including medical and therapy staff was keeping
contemporaneous high quality records.

° Areview of staffing levels was carried out against the QNIC Standards.

We also used the contract meeting process to ensure learning points from this incident
were shared through the Priory Group and were assured that there were processes in
place to do this.

We have used the forums we have with providers in Wessex House and across the
South of England to share this learning wider than the Priory Group.

Yours sincerely,

OgN, , MD, DSc, FRCS, FRCP
National Medical Director
NHS England

High quality care for all, now and for future generations

Related reports

Other reports by Lydia Brown

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.