Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2015
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2015-0312, written 7 Aug 2015. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 7 Aug 2015 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2015-0312 |
| Deceased | Amanda Ellams |
| Coroner | John Pollard |
| Coroner area | Manchester South |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Organisation named | Stockport NHS Foundation Trust |
| 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 REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: BMI Healthcare and to GTD Healthcare. 1 | CORONER | am John Pollard, senior coroner, for the coroner area of South Manchester 2 | 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 3 | INVESTIGATION and INQUEST On 2™ March 2015 | commenced an investigation into the death of Amanda Jane Ellams dob 21% March 1963. The investigation concluded on the 4" August 2105 and the conclusion was one of a narrative conclusion. The medical cause of death was 1a Ischaemic Heart Disease 1b Coronary Artery Atheroma 11. Subacute bowel obstruction due to band adhesions, Abdominal Hernia Repair (February 2015) 4 | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH In 2008 this lady had a gastric band fitted. In 2011 she suffered bowel problems which were not directly related to the gastric band procedure, but which required open surgery. Following that surgery she suffered with an increasingly large incisional hernia and with band adhesions. This hernia was repaired in February 2015, and she died approximately four days post operatively. 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. During the course of the inquest it was apparent that the standard of note keeping at the Alexandra Hospital (both medical and nursing) was well below that which would be generally regarded as satisfactory. There was even one attendance on the patient by the consultant surgeon in February (according to the surgeon’s evidence to me) for which there was no written record whatsoever. The surgeon conceded that he did not have a full medical history available to him pre-operatively and he was not aware of all the prescribed drugs which she was taking.(BMI Healthcare) 2. The Alexandra Hospital Staff Nurse conceded that Mrs Ellams was discharged from hospital even though it is now clear that her oxygen saturations were still too low for such discharge to take place. There was what appeared to be a very lax attitude to recording and monitoring the Blood/Oxygen levels and the patient was allowed to disconnect her oxygen supply and walk out of the ward to go for a cigarette.(BMI Healthcare) 3. The out-of-hours telephone system for the District Nursing team in Tameside area was operated by GTD Healthcare (which also provides the out-of-hours GP service in that area). It was apparent that during the night of her death, Mrs Ellams had made three separate calls to the telephone number she had been given to contact the District Nurses and none of those calls was answered. The duration of the unanswered calls was 2 minutes, 1 minute 50 seconds and 1 minute 14 seconds respectively. In giving his evidence, the Chief Executive of GTD conceded that “it is a flawed system”. (GTD Healthcare) 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. YOUR RESPONSE You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 2™ October 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 | have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons namely EN (Son of the deceased). | have also sent it to Stockport NHS Foundation Trust (which runs the Tameside District Nursing) who may find it 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 seriqJ a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of interest, may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your response, 96 he release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner. 7.8.15 lohn Pollard, HM Senior Coroner
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.
Si Lf ZINES The Alexandra ; Serious about health. Passionate about care. fl Hospital Your Ref: JSP/KN/00585-2015 Our Ref: SA/TJB-Ellams-7229761 17" September 2015 Mr J S Pollard H M Coroner Coroner’s Court 1 Mount Tabor Street Stockport SK1 3AG Dear Mr Pollard Re: Amanda Jane Ellams (Deceased) | am writing in response to your Regulation 28 Report of 7" August 2015 2015, following the Inquest of Amanda Jane Ellams. You have asked The Alexandra Hospital for a response to the matters of concern raised within the report and to detail the actions and proposed actions to be taken by the Hospital, along with the timetable for these actions. Please see our responses below. Concern 1 During the course of the inquest it was apparent that the standard of note keeping at the Alexandra Hospital (both medical and nursing) was well below that which would be generally regarded as satisfactory. There was even one attendance on the patient by the consultant surgeon in February (according to the surgeon’s evidence to me) for which there was no written record whatsoever. The surgeon conceded that he did not have a full medical history available to him pre-operatively and he was not aware of all the prescribed drugs which she was taking, (BMI Healthcare) The patient record has been reviewed and this issue has been discussed directly with the consultant surgeon and the nurse involved in the care of the patient. Whilst the majority of the notes entered within the patient record are satisfactory, it is clear there were a number of entries or omissions that were not of the standard expected. The hospital expects and works to uphold, the highest standards of record keeping. At the time of this response, hospital-wide completion of training on documentation and legal aspects for patient records was 95%. Further documentation training has been scheduled to be delivered by the Royal College of Nursing and we continue to work with all staff and consultants to maintain and improve the standard of record keeping. The consultant surgeon agrees that his hand written notes on occasion were very brief. As he explained at the hearing, these were personal notes, which act as reminders when writing dictated letters, which contained more detailed information. The consultant surgeon will, in the future, ensure that he writes such information and clinical findings in more detail in order to better comply with the guidelines of the Royal College of Surgeons. Mill Lane, Cheadle, Cheshire SK8 2PX T0161 428 3656 FOI6! 491 3867 Einfo@bmihealthcare.co.uk www.bmihealthcare.co.uk BMI Healthcare Limited Registered in Eng'and Number 216427C. Registered office BMI Healthcare House. 3 Paris Garden, Southwerk, London SEI 8ND. The consultant surgeon accepts that one post-operative visit to the patient was not documented. He recalls that the patient was not on the ward when he visited but he met her outside the building and walked her back to her room and consequently he omitted to write this interaction in the notes. The consultant has reflected on events and has confirmed that he will work to ensure that each visit to a patient is recorded in the patient record. The consultant surgeon fully appreciates the importance of understanding details of past medical history and medications. However, the consultant surgeon has advised that no such information was provided by the patient's GP, (who would have provided details of the patient's past medical history on referral) and neither Mrs Ellams nor her husband provided such information when asked in the clinic. The consultant does however accept that more could be done to elicit past medical history when discussing treatment with patients and he will work to ensure that additional enquiry of the patient history is made. We have taken the following actions: 1. From June 2015 a new documentation standards audit has been established. The audit is completed by nursing staff and any variances, omissions or errors are recorded and the results shared through a peer review to ensure learning is shared and improvements made, where identified. 2. The company lead for care pathway development has been asked to attend the hospital to deliver education sessions on the completion of patient care pathways to all clinical staff. The delivery of this training is expected to be complete by the end of October 2015. 3. The Royal College of Nursing have been invited to attend the hospital to deliver presentations to nursing staff on the importance of documentation standards. This training is expected to be complete by December 2015. Concern 2 The Alexandra Hospital Staff Nurse conceded that Mrs Ellams was discharged from hospital even though it is now clear that her oxygen saturations were still too low for such discharge to take place. There was what appeared to be a very lax attitude to recording and monitoring the Blood/Oxygen levels and the patient was allowed to disconnect her oxygen supply and walk out of the ward to go for a cigarette. (BMI Healthcare) The consultant confirmed during the hearing that the patient's oxygen saturation readings of 90-92% would generally be adequate in view of her cigarette smoking and the recorded oxygen saturation level was 89% on the morning of discharge when the nurse decided to commence oxygen. It is unsatisfactory that information regarding the patient's oxygen saturation level prior to discharge was not recorded. The consultant and the nurse accept that all actions and decisions taken must be clearly documented in the patient record. The nurse has reflected on her note keeping on that day, and admits that she should have documented Mrs Ellams’ observations while off oxygen, before discharge. It should be appreciated that there are difficulties in attempting to stop patients who wish to smoke outside of the hospital premises, especially on the day they are due to be discharged. As discussed at the hearing, the nurse made a clinical assessment of the patient's condition due to the patient frequently removing the oxygen to leave the ward to smoke a cigarette, and walking up and down the hospital corridor and stairs with no signs of shortness of breath at the time. Having reflected on events, the nurse now always ensures that all observations are recorded in the patient notes. We have taken the following actions: 1. During September 2015 all relevant nursing staff will be notified that nursing notes should always include a record of observations taken after patients have been taken off oxygen. 2. Following the hearing, the nurse involved was reminded of her responsibility for accurate record keeping and has reflected upon events and clearly recognises that judgements in relation to the clinical presentation of a patient must be documented in the patient record. We have taken the matters of concern identified in your report extremely seriously and | would like to assure you that the actions identified above are ongoing and will be continually monitored. | trust the responses given above have addressed your concerns and may | take this opportunity to again express the Hospital’s sincere condolences to Mrs Ellams’ family. Yours sincerely Stee Sarah Agnew Acting Executive Director
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Stockport NHS Foundation 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.