Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2015
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2015-0183, written 11 May 2015. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 11 May 2015 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2015-0183 |
| Deceased | Margaret Wright |
| Coroner | Jennifer Leeming |
| Coroner area | Manchester (West) |
| Category | Community health care and emergency services related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
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) NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest. REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 1. Secretary of State for Health 1 | CORONER Tam M Jennifer Leeming, Senior Coroner, for the Coroner Area of Manchester West 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 31* December 2014 I commenced an investigation into the death of Margaret Elaine Wright, 72 years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 7" May 2015. The conclusion of the inquest was that Margaret Elaine Wright died of a complication of surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma which carcinoma was itself a complication of previous blood transfusions. 4 | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Between the 7th January 1969 and the 21st January 1969 Margaret Elaine Wright was transfused 11 units of blood at Bury General Hospital. In 2012 she was diagnosed to have hepatitis C and to have developed liver cirrhosis. In 2014 she was diagnosed to have developed hepatocellular carcinoma. These were consequent upon the aforementioned blood transfusions having been contaminated. On the 7 of November 2014 she underwent surgery for hepatocellular carcinoma at the Manchester Royal Infirmary. She was discharged from that hospital on the 11° December 2014. Thereafter her condition gradually deteriorated until on the 17 of December 2014 her husband contacted his Doctor's practice and requested a home visit. The Doctor doing home visits on that day was unaware of Mrs Wright’s recent surgery since the practice had not received a discharge summary from the hospital. The Doctor therefore visited other patients during the afternoon of the 17" of December, which meant that he had insufficient time to visit Mrs Wright until the evening. Before the Doctor arrived Mrs Wright collapsed. An ambulance was called and she was admitted to hospital, where she died on the 23 December 2014. 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)The Doctors did not at that time telephone patients or their families when a home visit had been requested to obtain further information about the patient’s situation. Had that happened in this case Mrs Wright would have received a priority visit, although there was no evidence that this would have affected the outcome. Evidence was given that since Mrs Wright's death a system of a Doctor telephoning patients or their families prior to visiting had been introduced, both in the Doctors practice in question and in the local area. Evidence was given that this best practice should be drawn to the attention of the Secretary of State for Health in order to prevent future deaths. ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion urgent action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and/or your organisation have 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 6" July 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. COPIES and PUBLICATION I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the followin Interested Persons EEN I have also sent it to Dr ee may find it useful or of interest. 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. Dated Signed 11™ May 2015 M Jennifer Leeming
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.
GR Rt Hon Alistair Burt MP Minister of State for Community and Social Care Department of H ealth Richmond House 79 Whitehall London SWIA 2NS POC3000915979 re as Ms J. Leeming , Senior Coroner Coroner's Officer HM Coroner's Court Paderborn House, Howell Croft North 23 JUL 2015 Bolton, BL! 1QY Dore Ws loaning Thank you for your letter of 11 May 2015 following the inquest into the death of Margaret Wright. I was very sorry to hear of Mrs Wright’s death and wish to extend my sincere condolences to her family. There are two areas of concern that you raise for our attention as a result of the inquest: The first relates to the system of GP patient home visits: - At the time, the doctors at Mrs Wright’s local GP practice did not routinely phone the patient or family members to obtain further information about the patient’s situation following a request for a home visit. Had this happened at the time, then Mrs Wright would have received a priority visit (although you point out that this may not have altered the outcome). - Since Mrs Wright’s death a system of phoning the patient/family prior to a home visit has been introduced by the GP practice concerned and in the local area. The second, and most concerning, highlights the fact that the GP practice did not receive a patient discharge summary for Mrs Wright, from Manchester Royal Infirmary, leaving the home visits doctor unaware of her recent surgery. The responsibility for sending a discharge summary rests firmly with the discharging Trust. The Trust has confirmed that, on discharge, a patient’s discharge notification should be posted to their GP and a copy filed within the hospital’s patient records. Staff at the Trust have reviewed Mrs Wright’s notes and have found that a copy of the discharge notification to her GP was electronically signed by the hospital doctor on 8 December 2014 and filed in her medical records. The notification contains details of diagnosis, treatment, discharge medication, out-patient follow up plans and other relevant information. Mrs Wright was discharged from hospital on 11 December 2014. Her GP should have received the discharge information by the time of her request for a GP home visit. The Trust cannot confirm that the letter was actually posted, or subsequently received, by the GP practice. This part of the process is not currently tracked or logged. However, the Trust is planning to utilise email and electronic links to enable tracking of whether discharge information has been sent and received. On home visiting itself, GP practices, under contracts with NHS England, are required to provide services to their patients that include a home visit in cases where there is a clinical need. However, the clinical care of the patient in a home setting is one which needs careful consideration by the GP. The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) is aware of the importance of this point and its training curriculum includes advice on, and prompts GPs to consider, the risks of seeing patients in different contexts, including the home. The chapter of the Curriculum dealing with patient safety and quality of care contains a hypothetical “case illustration” setting out an account of the circumstances surrounding a patient’s death, where home visiting had been a key factor, and the challenges that the case presented to the practice. Doctors in training using this resource are prompted to consider how seeing patients in a different setting such as the home, on a busy day, might impact upon clinical care. http://www.rcgp.org.uk/training-exams/gp-curriculum-overview/~/media/Files/GP- training-and-exams/Curriculum-2012/RCGP-Curriculum-2-02-Patient-Safety-and- Quality-Of-Care.ashx In addition, the importance of considering the contextual aspects of clinical care are emphasised in a further chapter of the GP Curriculum entitled “The GP in Wider Professional Environment”. http://www.rcgp.org.uk/training-exams/gp-curriculum-overview/~/media/Files/GP- training-and-exams/Curriculum-2012/RCGP-Curriculum-2-03-GP-In-Wider- Professional-Environment.ashx ae Department of Health The introduction states: “As a clinical and general practitioner at the frontline of health services, you will need to understand not only how to work within systems of healthcare but also how to work with those systems for the benefit of your patients. This will require an understanding of the context, structures and processes in and by which care is delivered that goes beyond that of your specific clinical role” NHS England has advised that its Primary Care Patient Safety Expert Group, which focusses on primary care and general practice concerns, is currently considering home visits. At their next meeting, to be held within the next six weeks, the group will consider the best way to ensure home visits are appropriate to individual patient needs. I would be happy to update you with their findings in due course. In addition, I understand the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence is currently drawing up guidance on “Home Care”, with a planned publication date of September 2015. Furthermore, I can advise that NHS England is making efforts to improve the safety of patient discharge. In August 2014, a Patient Safety Alert was issued which launched a national programme of work to support organisations in improving the communication and management of patient information at handover. One of the initial priorities is to share best practice to improve the quality and timeliness of communication. I hope that you find this reply helpful and I am grateful to you for bringing the circumstances of Mrs Wright’s death to my attention. Jousy rear, ALISTAIR BURT Oauw Cnr » hea re Ce ce se %y ory oe fod sect & Ww Weak fu Me Gn & seen Corum ihc
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Community health care and emergency services 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.