Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2016

Patrick Curran

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2016-0258, written 14 Jul 2016. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report14 Jul 2016
Reference2016-0258
DeceasedPatrick Curran
CoronerAndrew Bridgman
Coroner areaManchester South
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. Mrs Diane Whittingham, Chief Executive, University Hospital South Manchester
NHS Foundation Trust Southmoor Road Wythenshawe Manchester M23 9LT

1

| CORONER

Andrew Bridgman, Assistant Coroner, for the coroner area of Manchester South.

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.

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On 26" February 2016 an investigation was commenced into the death of Patrick Curran
who died at Trafford General Hospital on 22™ February 2016.

The investigation concluded with an Inquest held on 13" duly 2016.
:Medical cause of death la Pneumonia
lb Asbestosis, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and
Adenocarcinoma of the lung (treated surgically)
Ic Smoking and asbestos exposure
| Coronary artery atheroma

Conclusion: Industrial Disease

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

In December 2015 Mr Curran was diagnosed with Stage 1B lung cancer (T2a NO MO) as
determined by PET scan carried out at the Manchester Royal Infirmary. Mr Curran was
referred —_ Consultant in Thoracic Surgery.

On 5" January 2016 Mr Curran underwent resection of the upper right lobe, and
mediastinal lymph nodes. Following surgery and histology the tumour was re-staged as
a Stage 3A (T3 N2 MO) poorly differentiated adenocarcinoma.

Mr Curran was discharged on the 4" post-operative day, 9" January 2016. He was
discharged with a chest drain in situ.

With regard to the chest drain Mr Curran was reviewed in a ‘nurse-led’ clinic on 18"
January, 25" January and 29" January. At the last appointment the chest drain was
removed. At none of these appointments was Mr Curran seen by a doctor.

Mr Curran attended for his first post-discharge review on 12" February. He was seen by

a Senior Specialist Nurse in Thoracic Surgery. It was noted that Mr Curran,
- looked a bit frait
- was struggling to recover post-operatively
- was low in mood
- had poor appetite and had lost weight, and that his family were encouraging
him to have Fortisips between meals in an attempt to regain weight

In his statement [I refers to the fact it was obvious, at that clinic, that Mr
Curran would not be able to tolerate adjuvant chemotherapy. That could only be based
on the Sister's assessment.

accepted that such a presentation would not be the norm for a 4-weeks
post discharge review.

A chest xray was taken. Fs stated in evidence that he reviewed this xray. In
his evidence he said there were no obvious suggestions of an ongoing chest infection. |
have not seen the radiologist’s report of that xray. | do not therefore know whether that
statement is correct either in so far as it related to obvious signs and in addition whether
more subtle changes were present.

Although| was asked to review the xray by the Sister he was not asked to
see Mr Curran. accepted in evidence that he ought to have been asked to
see Mr Curran, and a fortiori he would have done.

Mr Curran was discharged by the Sister back to NS MMedvised that it

would likely be 3-4 weeks before Mr Curran was seen.

was not immediately aware that Mr Curran had been discharged and that
he had not seen him post-op. An attempt was made to contact Mr Curran on 22™
February.

Mr Curran was admitted to Trafford General Hospital on 17" February. He was very
unwell. The impression was of a pneumonia that had “been developing for a period of
weeks’. It was treated, given the history of recent admission for surgery, as a hospital
acquired pneumonia and IV Tazocin administered. Treatment was unfortunately not
successful and Mr Curran passed away in the early hours of 2a" February.

CORONER'S CONCERNS

It is highly likely that Mr Curran had a pneumonia on 12” February, hence his
presentation as described by the Specialist Sister. It is possible that the pneumonia was
present at the chest drain reviews.

It causes me great concern that a patient who must have been presenting as unwell and
not as expected at a 4 weeks post-operative was not only not seen by a doctor, but was
discharged without the Consultant in charge’s knowledge.

| also have concerns about the fact that over 3 appointments at a ‘nurse-led’ clinic
despite there being issues with the chest drain Mr Curran was not once reviewed by a
doctor.

arena told me that he spoke with the Specialist Sister involved but | am not
satistied that this provides me with adequate assurance that,

a) first post-operative reviews and discharges of patients without a doctor seeing

that patient is not a common and accepted practice, in the main because in
many of the answers given to me on this element of the care provided to Mr
Cura was keen to enlighten me as to how experienced this
particular Specialist Sister was.

b) and in the circumstances this will not happen again.

| had no evidence as to whether or not had one Mr Curran the outcome
would have been different. It seems to me that there was at least the possibility that the
outcome would have been different.

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. That Wythenshawe Hospital have adopted or condoned a practice whereby first
Post-operative reviews are conducted by nursing staff (of whatever specialist
level of training) without any or any adequate medical overview.

2. That Wythenshawe Hospital have adopted or condoned a practice whereby
patients can be, and are, discharged from care ai first post-operative review, or
indeed any review, by nursing staff (of whatever specialist level of training)
without any or any adequate medical overview.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken by Wythenshawe Hospital to investigate the
circumstances of Mr Curran’s discharge from care on 12" February at his first post-
operative review without being seen by his operating surgeon, or any other doctor,
when he was clearly not recovering well and in line with expectations.

Having carried out such an investigation to then set in place a system that would avoid a
recurrence of the same, whether or not the patient presents as unwell.

YOUR RESPONSE

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by 8” September 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

| have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner.

| have sent a copy of my report cf

| 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.

14.07.2016 Mr Andrew Bridgman
Assistant Coroner

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 University Hospital of South Manchester (PDF)
University Hospital of South Manchester INHS|

NHS Foundation Trust

Medical Director's office

Wythenshawe Hospital

Trust HQ R EC E IVE D " Southmoor Road
Tel: 0161 297 2027 Wythenshawe
Fax: 0161 291 2037 ~7 SEP 2016 Manchester
M23 SLT

Tet: 0161 998 7070
5 September 2016

Mr Andrew Bridgman
Assistant Coroner
Manchester South

1 Mount Tabor Street
Stockport

SK1 3AG

Dear Mr Bridgman,

Re: PFD

Patients Name: Patrick Curran
D.0.B: 06.12.1933

D.O.D: 22.02.2016

RM No: RM267048

| am responding to the Regulation 28 — Prevention of Future Deaths Report Issued to
University Hospitals of South Manchester (UHSM) on 14 July 2016.

1. Concern: That Wythenshawe Hospital have adopted or condoned a practice whereby
first post-operative reviews are conducted by nursing staff (of whatever specialist
level of training) without any or any adequate medical overview.

Thank you for making the Trust aware of your concerns. In line with a national move
towards nurse-led clinics the expertise and training of our nursing staff renders them very
capable of conducting post-operative clinics in the cardiothoracic unit. Thoracic surgery
patients are seen in the outpatient clinic for their follow ups by any member of the team and
this could be the Consultant, Registrar, SHO or a specialist nurse who has many years of
thoracic surgery experience. All clinics are supported by Consultant cover as required. If
there are concerns with a patient they are always discussed with the Consultant or if there
are any concerns with an x-ray, Radiology are asked to report these.

Notwithstanding this, we would like to reassure you that there was medical oversight at
these clinics. When Mr Curran was seen at clinic in February 2016, the clinic would be
nurse-led with the consultant surgeon available by telephone. We have strengthened this
and now our post-operative clinics are led by nurses but with a consultant present in the
same clinic.

2. Concern: That Wythenshawe Hospital have adopted or condoned a practice whereby
patients can be, and are, discharged from care at first post-operative review, or

sABOy, Ae
fs
We Chairman - Barry Clare U S M

a ae on eee

Mb,

oy INVESTORS
rs
4,2 IN PEOPLE

ROSiz,

indeed any review, by nursing staff (of whatever specialist level of training) without
any or any adequate medical overview.

Thank you for making the Trust aware of your concerns. As set out above, the system has
been strengthened and a consultant is present at the first post-operative review clinic.

Mr Curran's x-ray taken on 12 February 2016 did not reveal! a chest infection or pneumonia.
A plan was made, on the basis that Mr Curran’s histology was not currently available, for him
to receive his histology at a separate time by way of follow up from EEE.“ The
decision regarding chemotherapy was not made until the histology was available. It was
therefore, in our view, entirely appropriate, based on his presentation on 12 February 2016
to discharge him albeit without his histology results which were to be given at a later
appointment. EE dic not feel the need to review Mr Curran but had he been asked
to review Mr Curran, it is his view that based on his x-ray and the description of Mr Curran’s
presentation he would not have admitted him. The x-ray from the 12 February 2016 was
compatible with post-operative findings.

lf you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Medical Director, UHSM

Related reports

Other reports by Andrew Bridgman

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.