Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0520, written 25 Nov 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 25 Nov 2014 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2014-0520 |
| Deceased | Ryan Loughran, Katie Joyce, Muhanna Alhayany and Sophie Ryan-Palmer |
| Coroner | Mary Hassell |
| Coroner area | Inner North London |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
Regulation 28: Prevention of Future Deaths report
Sophie RYAN-PALMER (died 17.07.13)
Katie JOYCE (died 06.10.13)
Ryan Stephen LOUGHRAN (died 10.07.13)
Muhanna Talal Hamad ALHAYANY (died 28.08.13)
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
1. NHS England
PO Box 16738
Redditch
B97 9PT
1
CORONER
I am: Coroner ME Hassell
Senior Coroner
Inner North London
St Pancras Coroner’s Court
Camley Street
London N1C 4PP
2
CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS
I make this report under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009,
paragraph 7, Schedule 5, and
The Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013,
regulations 28 and 29.
3
INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
On various dates in 2014, I commenced investigations into the deaths of
Sophie Ryan-Palmer, Katie Joyce, Ryan Loughran and Muhanna
Alhayany, four children who had died in 2013 following treatment at the
National Hospital for Sick Children at Great Ormond Street in London.
The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest earlier today. I
made a narrative determination, which I attach.
4
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
As you will see from the narrative, all the children were treated with stem
cell transplants, but it later appeared that there might be an issue with the
cryopreservation of the stem cells.
1
Identifying the fact that there was any problem at all, still less the nature
of that problem, was not straight forward. Those treating the children and
then investigating potential causes of their failure to recover, were
they had no means of
fact
significantly hampered by
benchmarking autologous stem cell engraftment.
that
the
This put these children at a significant disadvantage and is likely to do the
same for some other children with cancer, not just at GOSH but all over
the country.
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.
1. I heard at inquest that there is concern within the medical
community over the whole governance structure for autologous
stem cell transplant in this country, most especially regarding the
lack of any one appropriate control risk group with a national lead.
2. I also heard that there is at present no disease specific national
benchmarking available for autologous stem cell engraftment. The
relevant results of an international SIOPEN trial (that aspect of
which closed in 2011) have not been made publicly available.
treating children
Those
following autologous bone marrow
transplant, do not know how many days to recovery is normal, so
they do not know what is abnormal, and whether the results in their
own hospital fall below the results elsewhere.
The failure to unlock the results of the SIOPEN trial could,
therefore, compromise the optimal care of some children with
cancer.
6
ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
In my opinion, action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
believe that you have the power to take such action.
2
7
YOUR RESPONSE
You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date
of this report, namely by 26 January 2015. 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.
8
COPIES and PUBLICATION
I have sent a copy of my report to the following.
and
HHJ Peter Thornton QC, the Chief Coroner of England & Wales
Care Quality Commission for England
Professor Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer for England
parents of Ryan
, parents of Muhanna
, Divisional Director, GOSH
, President, SIOPEN
Director, Planer plc
, parents of Sophie
, parents of Katie
and
and
and
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
interest. You may make
representations to me, the Senior Coroner, at the time of your response,
about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief
Coroner.
it useful or of
find
9
DATE SIGNED BY SENIOR CORONER
25.11.14
3
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.
NHS England Skipton House 80 London Road London SE1 6LH 3 February 2015 Coroner ME Hassell Senior Coroner Inner North London St Pancras Coroner’s Court Camley Street London N1C 4PP Dear Coroner Regulation 28: Prevention of Future Deaths Report. Ref 368837 Thank you for your letter informing us of the findings of the Report to Prevent Future Deaths, , which we received on 27 November 2014. This report reflected on the experience of four children, all of whom sadly died as a result of graft failure following stem cell transplantation at Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust (GOS). The role of NHS England © As you identified, NHS England has a duty to respond in these matters as the commissioner for prescribed specialised services, which include blood and marrow transplants for children. NHS England directly commissions blood and marrow transplants for children. This includes a responsibility for specifying the detail of the services to be provided, including the standards to be met, and for monitoring delivery of these standards. Under its mandate from the Department of Health, NHS England is legally-bound to pursue the goal of continuous improvement in the quality of health services. NHS England works to commission evidence based, equitable services which improve outcomes and patient experience. This includes learning from reports such as yours, and ensuring that the lessons learned are shared across the NHS. On receipt of your report, Simon Stevens, Chief Executive of NHS England, asked that appropriate colleagues across NHS England work to establish the actions necessary to reduce the risk of future deaths. | would like to assure you that NHS England has reviewed in detail the findings of the report, and has considered its implications for clinical practice, quality assurance and the commissioning of these services. As National Clinical Director for Specialised Commissioning, | convened a review group of senior clinical and management staff to consider your report, and to make recommendations to me on its findings and the actions which should be taken in response. This has included working with a range of stakeholders to identify opportunities to further strengthen governance and to reduce the risk of future deaths. The work of the review group has informed this response to you. Key themes from your report As your report identifies, these tragic cases highlight a number of complex issues in relation to.stem cell transplantation. For this response, | have addressed these points under two headings: . ¢ Quality assurance of technical processes involved in transplantation ¢ Clinical governance (including peer review, audit and benchmarking of outcomes) | will deal in turn with issues relating to each of these areas, and then set out the actions which NHS England is taking to address them and to reduce the risk of future deaths. Quality assurance of technical processes involved in transplantation Your report confirms that the procedure used for processing cells was the cause of the engraftment failure which unfortunately occurred in all of these children. However, we also note your conclusion that a more successful graft would not have changed the outcome for three of the children, and it remains unclear whether it would have changed the outcome in the case of the fourth child. The deaths of these children were reported by GOS through the national incident reporting system in the NHS as a serious incident (an Sl). In response, NHS England’s London Regional Team worked with the Trust to review the cryopreservation serious incident. The investigation and action plan have provided assurance that procedures and protocols have changed as a result. The key points of learning from the incident have already been shared with other paediatric transplant providers by the British Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (BSBMT), and we will in February be issuing an NHS England. Specialised Services Circular to all teams involved in commissioning specialised services to highlight the concerns raised and the actions being taken nationally, and required of Regional teams, to respond to your recommendations With regard to the processing of cells, NHS England requires that transplant providers implement the regulatory and quality assurance systems that are a condition of Joint Committee-ISCT (Europe) & EBMT (JACIE) accreditation. As part of NHS England's contractual derogation processes, we agree timed action plans with providers who do not currently meet this standard and will suspend the commissioning, or decommission, providers where this is not rectified within the required timescale and we believe that this could present a significant issue concerning the safety and quality of care provided. Your report focuses most attention on the clinical governance for transplants and the rest of our response facuses on this and the action-NHS-England, with its stakeholders,-is taking to- resolve this issue. Clinical governance (including peer review, audit and benchmarking of outcomes) Blood and Bone Marrow Transplantation (BMT) is a low volume, high risk procedure. In 2013, BSBMT recorded a UK total of 370 transplants in children and 83 of those were autologous transplant (where the donor and recipient are the same person). Relapse is the major cause of treatment failure in the autologous setting with 90% of paediatric deaths due * to relapse. The governance arrangements for paediatric BMT are set out in the following NHS England prescribed specialised service specifications: Actions by NHS England in response to your report 1. Guidance to commissioners and providers: NHS England will issue to commissioning teams and providers in February a Specialised Services Circular restating the requirement that transplants should only take place and be funded in providers compliant with the BMT / Paediatric Oncology service specifications i.e.: e With the appropriate JACIE clinical programme accreditation. e Using JACIE accredited laboratories / collection and processing facilitates * Compliant with the published policy for transplants which includes evidenced based indications for transplant. e Reporting to the national registry ¢ Participating in the new expert group, MDT and audit arrangements. 2. Review of service specifications: NHS England will also be reviewing the service specifications relating to bone marrow transplants for children and making any changes in wording required to clarify and reinforce this requirement. 3. Establishment of a new national expert group: NHS England has agreed with the Paediatric Cancer Clinical Reference Group (CRG) and JACIE to establish a national oncology group of experts systematically reviewing research and cases to inform indications, protocols and benchmarking. We consider that this will enhance governance and reduce ‘the risk of future deaths occurring. The Paediatric Cancer CRG is leading the establishment of this group, with the first meeting being planned for February 2015. This group will report on a review of the indications for autologous transplants for solid tumours and advise on any changes required to the Clinical commissioning policy. The group will also review individual cases and act as the forum for audit and benchmarking. We expect this oncology group and the UK Paediatric BMT Group to forge strong links so that a full picture of transplant in children can be shared and understood. 4. Improved reporting: This expert oncology group will enhance the current reporting into the BSBMT registry to enhance the benchmarking through this route. This will in turn support the ongoing development and refinement of the NHS England Quality Dashboard, which we use as a key tool to compare outcomes and identify good practice. 5. Assurance: NHS England will commission its internal quality surveillance team to support and assure changes in governance are implemented. In-this response to your report; Ihave described the role of NHS England, summarised the key themes, and described the actions that NHS England is taking. | hope this provides you with the assurance that you are seeking about how NHS England is taking forward the lessons learned from the sad deaths of the children concerned. With best wishes Yours sincerely National Clinical Director, Specialised Commissioning
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.