Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2015

Piotr Kucharz

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2015-0465, written 24 Nov 2015. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report24 Nov 2015
Reference2015-0465
DeceasedPiotr Kucharz
CoronerAlan Wilson
Coroner areaBlackpool and Fylde
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Suicide (from 2015)
Organisation namedLancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. 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: 

Chief Executive, Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust 
Sceptre Point 
Sceptre Way 
Walton Summit 
Preston 
PR5 6AW 

1 

CORONER 

I am Alan Wilson, Senior Coroner, for the area of Blackpool & Fylde 

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 11 February 2015 I opened an inquest into the death of Piotr Grzegorz Kucharz 
aged 37 years. 

The inquest concluded on 19th November 2015.  

The conclusion of the Coroner as to the death was a narrative conclusion as follows: 

Piotr Kucharz took his own life after the risk of him doing so was not fully 
recognised. 

The medical cause of death was: 

1 (a) Cerebral Hypoxia 

1 (b) Ligature Strangulation                                 .                 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Box 3 of the Record of Inquest recorded as follows: 

Piotr Kucharz, previously diagnosed as suffering from, schizophrenia, was 
admitted to a mental health hospital during the evening of Friday 3 October 
2014.  

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Having last been seen alive at 1605 hours on Wednesday 8 October 2014, and 
after subsequent and planned checks on his welfare did not take place, he was 
found unresponsive and lying on the floor of his room at approximately 17.15 
hours having used a cord as a ligature to strangle himself. He was taken to 
hospital, where despite treatment he passed away at approximately 2200 hours on 
12 October 2014. The absence of an effective translation service to assist with his 
limited understanding of English, and a decision made on 7 October 2014 to 
reduce the frequency of checks made on his welfare contributed to his decision to 
end his life. 

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. Piotr Kucharz was a Polish gentleman who commenced living in the United 
Kingdom in April 2014. At the time he sought to strangle himself with a cord he 
was an informal patient at the Conway Ward at Parkwood, a mental health 
facility in Blackpool. At his inquest, evidence was heard from a number of 
members of staff as regards what constitutes an effective observation. He was the 
subject of what were described as Safety and Security [SAS] and general 
observations the completion of which was the responsibility of a number of 
members of care staff. The evidence heard from staff raised an area of concern 
because that evidence indicated quite clearly that there was a lack of consistency 
and clarity as regards what constitutes an effective observation. 
An independent expert witness indicated in a report that he completed prior to 
the inquest that he felt custom and practice was such that some staff were merely 
checking on the “whereabouts” of the patient.  
Some staff felt that they were expected to enter the room of the patient and to try 
to engage with him and to check the room environment for anything that may 
pose a risk to him. Others felt that whether they were expected to actually enter a 
patient’s room to conduct the observation could vary depending on the level of 
risk a particular patient presented, in other words that they felt they had an 
element of discretion as regards whether they entered the room. This evidence 
appeared to be in contrast to a Trust policy. 
In the case of Piotr Kucharz, as can be seen above he had limited understanding 
of English, and a number of staff gave evidence that he remained in his room 
throughout his time on the Conway Ward and did not wish to engage with them. 
Nevertheless, the author of the Trust’s Sudden Untoward Incident Review 
document agreed that there was no such discretion and that staff ought to enter 
the room to complete and effective observation.  
At the conclusion to the inquest I expressed the view that I was concerned that 
there is a risk of future deaths because staff remain unclear about what amounts 
to an effective observation, and more specifically whether there are 
circumstances which may allow them to refrain from verbally engaging with a 
patient, or from physically entering a patient’s room to check the environment, 
and that should that lack of consistency and clarity prevail, other patients may be 
placed at risk as a result of inadequate observations.  

2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 For the avoidance of doubt, I confirm that I am of the opinion that the above 
concern remains valid despite the fact that further to Piotr Kucharz’s death the 
provision of mental health care for patient’s such as Piotr has moved from the 
Conway Ward at Parkwood to another facility within my jurisdiction at which 
members of staff who were working at the time of Piotr’s death continue to be 
employed in a similar capacity. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you 
[AND/OR your organisation] have the power to take such action.  

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 19th January 2016. 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 following Interested 
Persons: 

The family of Piotr Grzegorz Kucharz 
The Priory Hospital, Altrincham, Cheshire  
The University Hospital of South Manchester 
The Manchester Mental Health & Social Care Trust  
[Consultant Psychiatrist at The Priory Hospital] 

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. 

8 

9 

A.A. Wilson 

Alan Wilson 
Senior Coroner for Blackpool & The Fylde 
Dated: 24th November 2015  

3

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 Respondent Not Named (PDF)
Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust 
Sceptre Point 
Sceptre Way 
Walton Summit 
Preston 
PR5 6AW 

Tel: 01772 695360 

Mr Alan Wilson 
Senior Coroner 
Coroner’s Office 
Municipal Buildings 
PO Box 1066 
Corporation Street 
Blackpool 
FY1 1GB 

08 January 2016 

Dear Mr Wilson, 

Piotr Kucharz (deceased) – Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths 

The Trust acknowledges receipt of your letter dated 24 November 2015.  

In the Regulation 28 report you raise the following concerns: 

1.  Staff are unclear what constitutes effective observation 
2.  Staff inconsistently applied the Observation Policy 
3.  The circumstances which may allow staff to refrain from engaging with a patient or 

from entering a patient’s room to check the environment are unclear. 

Shortly  before  Mr  Kucharz  died  the  Trust  was  in  the  process  of  revising  its  clinical  risk 
assessment tool and policy. New standard and enhanced risk assessment tools, which sit 
in  the  Electronic  Care  Record  (ECR),  were  developed  by  a  multi-disciplinary  group  of 
clinicians.  From  March  2015  these  tools  replaced  the  previous  Standard  Safety  Profile 
which was in use at the time of Mr Kucharz’s death. The aim of the new risk  assessment 
tools  are  to  improve  the  quality  of  the  clinical  risk  assessment  conducted  by  staff,  to 
promote  better  collaboration  with  patients,  more  structured  clinical  risk  assessment  and 
more  robust  clinical  risk  formulations  and  risk  management  plans.  This  helps  staff 
understand better the risks that patients pose to themselves and others, vulnerability and 
any safeguarding risks and therefore the level and type of support they need to stay safe 
including observations. 

Chair: Mr Derek Brown 

Chief Executive: Professor Heather Tierney-Moore OBE 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Since  March  2015  the  Trust  has  been  training  in-patient  staff  to  use  the  new  risk 
assessment  tools  and  formulation  model.  This  training  supports  staff  in  using  the  5P's 
model  (presenting  needs,  predisposing  factors,  precipitating  factors,  perpetuating  factors 
and protective factors).  

We  are  planning  an  external  review  into  the  effectiveness  of  this  new  clinical  risk 
assessment tool and policy, to be completed in April 2016 once we are twelve months into 
the  usage  of  the  new  tool.  This  will  provide  us  with  robust  assurance  into  the 
implementation and effectiveness of this new approach.  

The Trust is also in the process of reviewing the observation policy and procedure. We are 
taking into account the learning from previous serious incidents and national best practice. 
This review is currently underway and we will be  developing and implementing a revised 
observation  policy  and  procedure.  The  new  observation  policy  and  procedure  will  be 
implemented by 31 March 2016.  

In  the  interim,  until  this  new  policy  and  procedure  is  developed  and  implemented,  an 
internal  patient  safety  alert  has  been  issued  to  remind  staff  of  the  current  policy  and 
procedure. This alert was sent to all inpatient services across the Trust.  

I hope this addresses your concerns and wish to assure you that we are keen to learn and 
improve the care we provide, to prevent similar incidents in the future. 

Should you require any further information the Trust will be more than willing to assist. 

Yours sincerely 

Dee Roach 
Executive Director of Nursing and Quality  

Chair: Mr Derek Brown 

Chief Executive: Professor Heather Tierney-Moore OBE

Related reports

Other reports by Alan Wilson

See all →

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

See all →

Track Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Lancashire Care 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.