Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2016

Mia Gibson

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2016-0180, written 11 May 2016. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report11 May 2016
Reference2016-0180
DeceasedMia Gibson
CoronerHeidi Connor
Coroner areaNottinghamshire
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Child Death (from 2015)
Organisation namedEast Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses publishednone published

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

INQUEST TOUCHING ON THE DEATH OF MIA GIBSON 

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS  

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1.  Richard Henderson, Chief Executive, East Midlands Ambulance Service 

NHS Trust (‘EMAS’) 

2. 

3. 

4. 

Chair of Association of Ambulance Chief Executives 

(‘AACE’) 

 Complaints and whistleblowing manager, Sustainable 

Improvement Team, NHS England  

 Accountable Officer, NHS Hardwick Clinical 

Commissioning Group (‘CCG’) 

1 

CORONER 

I am Heidi Connor, assistant coroner for the coroner area of Nottinghamshire. 

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 7th December 2015 I commenced an investigation into the death of Mia Gibson (age 
7 hours). The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 5th May 2016. The 
conclusion of the inquest was a narrative conclusion as follows : 

Mia Gibson died on the day of her birth, 16 November 2015, at Queen’s Medical Centre, 
Derby Road, Nottingham. Her mother had an uncomplicated and low risk pregnancy, but 
suffered a sudden and unexpected placental abruption on 16 November 2015. There 
was no available ambulance to take her mother to hospital initially, resulting in delay in 
her delivery. The evidence suggested that delivery anything up to 20 minutes earlier is 
likely to have avoided Mia’s death. 

The medical cause of death was :  

1a Severe hypoxic ischaemic encephalopathy 
1b Placental abruption.  

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

 Her father is 

Mia Gibson’s mother is 
an uneventful and low risk pregnancy. She and her partner had attended all antenatal 
appointments together. 
16 November 2015. 
rang the maternity unit and reported that 
had lost a significant amount of fresh red blood. They were advised that 
should come in to hospital. They were advised to ring an ambulance for that purpose. 
They did not have their own transport, but the midwife also felt that would be the fastest 
and safest way for 

suffered a placental abruption in the early hours of 

to come in. 

 had 

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  to East Midlands Ambulance Service at 0229 hrs. It was 
A call was made by 
categorised as Red 2. No double-crewed ambulance (‘DCA’) was available to attend – 
the nearest resource was a fast response vehicle (‘FRV’), then in Ripley in Derbyshire. It 
was accepted in evidence that 
transfer to hospital – indeed that was the purpose of the 999 call.  

was highly likely from the outset to require 

The FRV paramedic attended, arriving at 0245 hrs. He was told that 
lost “2 or 3 coffee cups” of fresh red blood, and he called for Red back up at 0248 hrs. 

had 

Again no DCA was available. The evidence was that, of the 10 ambulances operating 
within a 30 minute radius of the scene, 8 were unavailable as they were attending 
scenes (eg handing over patients at hospital). The remaining 2 were marked ‘NPR’ (or 
no planned rest) – ie they had gone beyond their meal window periods, and were 
therefore both on compulsory breaks – which can only be disturbed for a cardiac arrest 
call. 

I made clear at the inquest that I am in no way critical of systems requiring crews to take 
breaks, which I accept are vital for staff wellbeing, safety, and staff retention. The 
evidence also suggested that many problems regarding availability of crews stem from 
delayed handovers of patients to hospital staff. 

A crew became available at 0300 hrs, and was immediately dispatched to the scene, 
arriving there at 0312 hrs. They left the scene at 0321 hrs, arrived at hospital at 0332 hrs 
and handed over to maternity staff at 0344 hrs. 

was reviewed immediately by midwives and doctors and Mia was delivered 
extremely quickly, at 0404 hrs. She was in a very poor condition from birth, and despite 
the involvement of neonatal doctors from the time of her birth, she died, with her 
parents, that day. 

Evidence suggested that delivery anything up to 20 minutes earlier would, on the 
balance of probabilities, have avoided Mia’s death. 

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. 

was not in 

It appears that great reliance was placed on the fact that 
pain and had normal observations. Little consideration appears to have been 
given to the ‘second patient’ (Mia), whose condition could not be monitored by 
paramedics. We heard evidence that in fact not all placental abruptions cause 
the mother significant pain, or concerning observations, but for the baby, it can 
be akin to a cardiac arrest. This factor appears to have been overlooked in the 
trust’s subsequent investigation report, which refers several times to how 
reassuring 
 clinical condition was, and was repeated in evidence 
by the paramedic witnesses. This is a clear training issue, and may well apply 
nationally. 

2.  No ‘open mic’ report was put out to see if other crews could make themselves 

available to attend this emergency. 

3.  Dispatchers appear to have allowed a situation to arise whereby the only 2 
DCAs not attending other jobs were both on compulsory meal breaks and 
therefore unavailable at the same time. Whilst meal breaks are vital for staff, 
planning the timing of these, by ambulance control, is critical for patient safety. 
Meal break management is already under review by EMAS.  
It was suggested that obstetric emergencies such as placental abruption could 

4. 

2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5. 

It is clear that resources played a part in these tragic events. No DCA was 
available to attend this emergency until 30 minutes after the call, and it took a 
further 12 minutes for a DCA to arrive after that. The time between the 999 call 
and 
minutes. It was clear from the outset that 
transfer to hospital – a mere 4 miles from her home address – but no resource 
was available. The evidence of those ‘on the ground’ clearly showed that this is 
far from an isolated incident, and I remain concerned that there is a risk of future 
deaths if this is not addressed. 

 being handed over to maternity staff was an hour and 15 
would require urgent 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you have the 
power to take such action. 

For the avoidance of doubt, I require responses as follows : 

1.  From EMAS on matters of concern listed above at paragraphs 1, 2, 3 & 4. 
2.  From AACE on paragraphs 1 and 4. 
3.  From NHS England and the CCG on paragraphs 4 (insofar as this relates to 

matters of resource) and 5. 

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 7 July 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. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to Mia’s parents. I have also 
sent a copy to Wendy Hazard at EMAS. 

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. 

9 

11 May 2016                                             HJ Connor 

3

Related reports

Other reports by Heidi Connor

See all →

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

See all →

Track East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS 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.