Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2016

Joanna Bowring

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2016-0027, written 27 Jan 2016. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report27 Jan 2016
Reference2016-0027
DeceasedJoanna Bowring
CoronerPatricia Harding
Coroner areaMid Kent and Medway
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:

1. Chief Executive Kent & Medway NHS & Social Care Partnership Trust

1 CORONER

| am Patricia Harding, senior coroner for the coroner area of Mid Kent & Medway

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 4" June 2015 | commenced an investigation into the death of Joanna Bowring, 32
years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 26" January 2016. The
conclusion of the inquest was that Joanna Bowring died on 1* June 2015 on the rail
track at Boxley, Kent from injuries sustained as a result of being struck by a high speed
train. She committed suicide.

4 | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

Joanna Bowring had been suffering with depression, paranoid delusions and suicidal
thoughts. She was receiving support and treatment from the mental health team in the
community. She had last been seen by the team on 28"" May 2015 at which time her
mental health was determined to have deteriorated and she had purchased rope from
the internet for which she would not give a reason. She had no active suicidal thoughts
at the time of the review and was not determined to meet the criteria for a hospital
admission. On the 1* June 2015 she committed suicide. There was evidence of
significant planning

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 patient and carer left an initial assessment conducted on 4" April 2015 without a
clear understanding of the service available and without a care plan

(2) Carers were not routinely included in the risk assessment process and their views
about the patient and knowledge of the patient were not actively sought

(3)Carers were not advised about any behaviours that might indicate an increased risk

of suicide

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe your
organisation 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 25" March 2016. |, 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 C: he following Interested
Persone cronts, brother
| 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.

27" January 2016 [SIGNED BY CORONER] Pg] ]

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)
Kent and Medway NHS}

NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust

Farm Villa

Hermitage Lane

Maidstone

Kent ME16 9PH

01622 724100

Chairman: Andrew Ling

Chief Executive: Angela McNab

24" March 2016
Your ref:
Our ref:

Patricia Harding

Senior Coroner for Mid Kent and Medway
Archbishops Palace

Maidstone

By post and email
Dear Ms Harding,

Joanna Bowring deceased
Regulation 28 — Prevention of Future Deaths Report

| refer to your letter of 27" January 2016 enclosing the Prevention of Future Deaths
Report arising out of the inquest into the Death of Joanna Bowring. | have been briefed
on the details of this case and would like to reassure you that the issues you raise are
ones that the Trust had already identified and which it takes extremely seriously. A
number of changes were already in chain at the time the inquest was heard but had not
yet been completed. The Trust fully understands why you therefore thought it important
to outline the following concerns to me in your letter which | will deal with in turn. |
enclose a number of documents including the Trust's action plan summarizing the steps
in progress.

1. The patient and carer left an initial assessment on 4 April 2015 without a
clear understanding of the service available and without a care plan (or
written indication of what would be happening next apart from a post-it
note and leaflet).

| am aware that you heard oral evidence fro Acting Assistant
Director that it is the Trust's expectation that patients will be provided with written
information upon leaving the Psychiatric Liaison Assessment as to these issues,
and that information should encompass more than just a leaflet and telephone
number and_ that the patient will be given a copy of their care plan (which can be
shared with their family with consent) in due course.

However, as | understand it your key concern is that really patients and / or their
carers should have something in writing which says what the outcome of the
Psychiatric Assessment is immediately following that assessment (ie on this
occasion that the patient is recommended for Crisis and Home Treatment),

where that will take place, what next steps or assessments need to take place,
when, where and for what purpose and so on.

This is something the Liaison Psychiatry they have been working on since last
year. As of the beginning of February 2016 after every assessment an Initial
Action Plan is required to be completed at the end of an assessment each
service user will have a written outcome so it is clear to both themselves and
their carers what the next steps will be. | attach the Initial Action Plan Proforma
(IAPP) that is completed for your information. The IAPP has been shared with
staff through a newsletter, team meetings and supervision as well as shared with
all GP surgeries. The IAPP is currently in the middle of its 12-week trial period
with the intention of all feedback being reviewed at the end of the trial.

. Carers were not routinely included in the risk assessment process and
their views about the patient and knowledge of the patient were not
routinely sought.

This is an important issue and one that had been identified by the Trust's internal
investigation and which | believe resented evidence of Trust
changes in this regard outlining the following steps that had been taken prior to
the inquest itself:

e That the Trust has met with all clinicians as part of its learning process to
emphasize the importance of engaging with the patient and carers
separately,

e That this issue has also been separately discussed by the Trust at its
Patient Safety Meetings, with the outcome that the Trust is
commissioning a senior psychotherapist with expertise in family therapy
to provide bespoke training to the Crisis and Community Mental Health
Teams. | am pleased to confirm that Nigel Jacobs, Family Inclusion
Project Lead, has started to provide training across the Service Line to all
front-line staff on working with Families with the intention that it assists
staff in engaging with carers

e The Trust has also embarked on taking forward Open Dialogue Training
where the focus will be on working with the individual and their family as
equal partners in care. Medway is one of the two areas where this is
being piloted. This is being taken forward currently, with the intention that
selected individual will need to attend a 4 week residential course, and
that it is envisaged that they will train others in what they have learned. It
was accepted that this was the start of a longer term process.

e The Trust has re-launched its carers protocol in February 2016 across the
service which includes an outline of possible "red flags", and what
behaviours carers may look out for. A copy of the Protocol is attached. A
review and audit will be undertaken in June to ensure that it is being
implemented appropriately.

e The Trust has met with Joanna Bowring’s family on a number of
occasions with the intention of using their experiences to feed into this
process.

e The learning had been embedded by the Trust in face to face meetings,
patient safety meetings, and individual written guidance (including by way
of policy update)

e In February an Audit was carried out of care plans and risk assessments
for evidence of Carer involvement. This has been carried out and a
report of it provided to the Leadership Forum. | enclose recent slides

setting out the findings of the audit and the steps being put in places to
increase compliance.

e The Service Line is to commission an external Risk Assessment Training
company (STORM) to deliver Nationally Recommended Risk Assessment
Training Trainors to key individuals

3. Carers were not advised about the behaviours which might indicate an
increased risk of suicide.

It is hoped that the steps outlined in number 2 above will help address point 3. As
explained in evidence this is however a very difficult and case specific point. | have
liaised with the Medical Director and with other clinical staff who have indicated the
difficulty as there is no one "red flag" marker which indicates an increased risk of
suicide generally, it is dependent on the patient; but there has been a recognition
that this could be useful (in line with the changes indicated above).

Yours Nain

Angela McNab
Chief Executive

Enclosures:
Acute Service Line Carers Protocol

Action plan in response to PFD
Powerpoint presentation to the Leadership Forum on action plan

Related reports

Other reports by Patricia Harding

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.