Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2016

Raymond Shepherd

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2016-0467, written 30 Dec 2016. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report30 Dec 2016
Reference2016-0467
DeceasedRaymond Shepherd
CoronerNigel Meadows
Coroner areaManchester City
CategoryCommunity health care and emergency services 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 .

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

° Fs Managing Director, Home Care Support Ltd, Human
Support Group, Craig House, 33 Ballbrook Avenue, Didsbury, Manchester, M20
3JG

e 7 Performance Director, Home Care Support Ltd.

e Trafford Metropolitan Borough Council — Social Services Department.

Copied for interest to:
e The Chief Coroner
e The Family of the deceased
° [ER — (ome Care Support Manager

CORONER

| am Nigel Sharman Meadows, H.M. Senior Coroner for the area of Manchester City.

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.

INQUEST

The inquest into the death of Raymond David SHEPHERD was opened on 11 February
2016 and concluded on 30 November 2016. | recorded the medical cause of death to be
1a. Hospital acquired pneumonia, II Periprosthetic left hip fracture, alcoholic liver

disease, liver cirrhosis, left ventricular failure, COPD, and emphysema.

| recorded an Accidental Death conclusion.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

1. The deceased was born on 25 July 1953 and lived at Flat 6, 405 City Road, Old
Trafford, Manchester. He suffered from chronic ill health and was only 62 years
of age. He suffered from alcoholic liver disease, liver cirrhosis, left ventricular
failure, COPD, and emphysema. His mobility was extremely limited. He was
being prescribed medication for his various conditions but continued to drink
alcohol.

He was initially provided with care from February 2014 and then with re-
ablement support by Home Care Support after a hospital admission. He then

was provided with domestic support from December 2014 and this was funded
by Trafford Council.

. This comprised domestic support which included personal care and cleaning as
well as help to produce meals. He managed all of his own medication. He

became well known to the Home Care Support carers and would drink alcohol

every night and would on occasion refuse help. He would also cancel care visits

and because of his poor mobility was unable to get to the toilet and would urinate
in a bucket. By the time of the events in question in early January 2016 he was
meant to be having two visits a day. His condition had been deteriorating
generally over time.

His Home Care Support customer file identified a number of risks and there was
a general recognition that he was at risk of falls.

The visiting Home Care Support carers are meant to complete a Service User
Comments Book.

A number of issues arise from them. For example, he was meant to have two
visits on 16 January 2016 but only one is recorded, similarly on 17 January 2016.
On 18 January 2016 in the afternoon visit it was recorded that he had a stomach
ache and didn’t want anything to eat and that he reported that he’d had two falls

that day and had banged his head. However, there was no call made to a GP or
the ambulance service.

On 19 January only one visit in the morning is recorded. The following day on 20
January 2016 in the afternoon he was found lying on the floor and needed help
to get on his feet. He claimed that he hadn’t hurt himself but didn’t want anything
to eat. Again there was no call to a GP or ambulance service. It is reported that
a phone call was made to the office about this and should this have happened
the court was told that a record should have been kept but it is unclear whether
or not any record was recorded and kept in this instance.

On 21 January 2016 in the afternoon it is recorded that he had had another fall
overnight and that he wasn’t feeling well but still no call was made to the GP or
ambulance service.

There was a further visit on the morning of 22 January 2016 and he was noted to
have a number of bruises and it is recorded that he declined to be checked over
by adoctor. The entries a sequential and can be read by the staff to see the
history. There was no visit recorded in the afternoon of 22 January 2016.

. On the morning of 23 January 2016 he was admitted to Trafford Hospital having
reportedly had a fall that morning having lost his balance whilst walking with a
zimmer-frame. He was unable to move his left leg upwards. He was assessed
and diagnosed has having suffered a fracture to his femur as well as an injury to
his left shoulder. He was reviewed with a plan to take him to surgery but
unfortunately his condition deteriorated and he developed a chest infection.
Unfortunately, his condition did not improve despite treatment but deteriorated
and he died on 30 January 2016.

. tis not clear whether or not he had any form of mental capacity assessment
undertaken but he clearly was an individual of high risk of self-neglect and
suffering accidental trauma.

12. The deceased death was preventable.

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. in the Home Care Support

The standard and detail of the record keeping

Service User comment book was of very poor standard.

The Home Care Support Customer file does not seem to have been updated
and reviewed.

On some occasions both daily visits were not undertaken.

From 18 January 2016 there were at least three occasions when the deceased
had either reported a fall or been found having after fallen, but no action was
taken to notify the GP or ambulance service.

The deceased was a service user with chronic health problems which affected
his mobility and was at high risk of suffering a fall as well as self-neglect. He
reported not wishing to eat anything over a period of days which again should
have triggered some concern.

Over a period of some days there seems to have been a deterioration in his
condition which could have been identified and steps taken to stop it by
appropriate referrals to primary health care services. In the event that led him to
having a further significant fall in which he fractured a femur as well as
sustaining other injuries. This in tum led to a hospital admission but he was not
fit enough to undergo surgery and died.

There was no mental capacity assessment undertaken or a review of this
arranged.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe you and your
organisation 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 Friday 17 February 2017. |, 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 Interested Persons. | have
also sent it to organisations who may find it useful or of interest.

lam 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.

Friday 30 December 2016 Mr Nigel Sharman Meadows
HM Senior 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 Human Support Group (PDF)
Mr. Nigel Sharman Meadows 
HM Senior Coroner 
Manchester (City) Area 
PO Box 532 
The Coroners Court 
Manchester Town Hall 
Albert Square 
Manchester 
M2 5BR 

14th February 2017 

Response to Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths. 

Dear Sir 

Information for consideration 

This response is in relation to the Regulation 28 Report issued on 30.12.2016 by email to members of 
the Human Support Group into the death of Mr. Raymond Shepherd, as part of my formal response, I 
wish to put forward some information to be considered. The comments book/daily record that is referred 
to  in the  report,  was  to our knowledge, still  at  the  home  of  Mr.  Shepherd  at the  time  of  his  death  in 
hospital. The information about the falls was only fully made available during the court hearing when it 
was given to 
 (Area Manager). As a Company, we were not invited to participate in any 
of the strategy meetings held by Trafford Council and we were not given the opportunity to be able to 
fully prepare for or to respond to the court’s questions about information held in the comments book 
until the information was presented during the inquest. 

1.Missed visits 

Following on from the inquest, we have had time to look at digital telephone call records as well as our 
Rota system regarding the dates of the missed visits referred to in the report. The report refers to missed 
visits on 16th January, 17th January, 19th January and 22nd January 2016. Please see the following 
information:- 

16th  January  (Saturday)  –  The  most  recent  commissioning  paperwork  from  Trafford  Council  dated 
10.08.2015 does not schedule a tea visit it on Saturday evenings. 

17th January (Sunday) – Sunday evening visits have not been provided since September 2015. A note 
on the Rota system states that the care plan (on the Rota system) has been amended to cancel the 
evening visits on Saturday and Sunday nights. 

19th  January  (Tuesday)  –  Tuesday  evening  visits  have  not  been  provided  since  October  2015.  I 
understand Mr. Shepherd had a long standing arrangement with a neighbour and they ate together on 
a Tuesday evening. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 22nd January (Friday) – This evening visit was cancelled by Mr. Shepherd. An inbound phone call from 
Mr. Shepherd’s mobile phone was received at 12.15 cancelling the visit that night, as evidenced from 
our digital call logs. 

2) Ongoing risk of falls 

Whilst this doesn’t negate the facts that Mr. Shepherd had several falls between 18th and 23rd January 
2016, that they were not reported fully to the Sale office or that a GP was not called for Mr. Shepherd, 
the paperwork that we have from Trafford Council in 2013 dated over a year before Mr. Shepherd was 
referred to  the  Human  Support Group  in  2014 for  the  Reablement  service  and  before  his  long term 
domiciliary care package was commissioned. This paperwork states Mr. Shepherd was at risk of falls 
and  had  declined  to  have  assistive  technology  or  a  pendant  alarm,  preferring  to  use  his  mobile 
telephone to summon help if needed. I can only assume that the date of 2013 on the paperwork was 
from a previously commissioned care package for Mr. Shepherd from another organisation.  

Mr. Shepherd’s long term alcohol abuse was known and well documented and there was nothing to 
suggest in any of the Trafford Council paperwork that Mr. Shepherd had did not have capacity and he 
continued  to  manage  his  own  finances,  shopping  and  medication.  Mr.  Shepherd  was  able  to 
communicate easily, and in the three months prior to his hospital admission on 23rd January 2016, 84 
phone  calls  were  made  by  Mr.  Shepherd  to  the  Human  Support  Group.  Despite  frequent  hospital 
admissions  (several  due  to  falls),  hospital  stays  including  a  notable  12  week  stay  in  late  2015,  and 
discharges as well as district nurses involved in his support, there has been a collective failure from 
many partner agencies to look at how alcohol affected Mr. Shepherd’s capacity to make day to day 
decisions. 

3) Lack of appetite 

Point 5 in the report refers to Mr. Shepherd’s appetite being diminished over a period of days and that 
this should have triggered concerns. I can’t negate this or explain why this did not trigger concerns from 
the Care Assistants scheduled to provide care, but it is known that Mr. Shepherd has historically had a 
poor appetite and had been prescribed fortisips to supplement his daily food intake. It is documented 
in the section of the comment book sent back as part of the Report that fortisips were given by the Care 
Assistants. 

4) Actions taken/Action to be taken 

4.1 Immediately after the inquest was held, I met with 
 (Area Manager) to discuss what 
had happened at the inquest and to look at plans that could be made going forward and lessons learnt. 
As information was available to us from the inquest that was not available to us before it took place, we 
were able to look at digital phone call logs as well as our rota system to look at the alleged missed visits 
in particular. The Company Board were made aware of the content of your Coroner’s report at the Board 
Meeting that took place in January 2017. 

4.2 A new care plan was already in development and a section was added about risks of falls and falls 
management. This was introduced to the wider Organisation on 1st December 2016.  

4.3  The  new  care  plan  was  amended  during  the  development  phase  to  look  at  capacity  and 
substance/alcohol abuse as well as more emphasis on food and nutrition.  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4.4 Development of a new falls policy and procedure has been underway in January 2017 and this will 
be rolled out nationally when completed. Paperwork developed as a result of this review is being tested 
w/c  13.03.2017  in  our  Bristol  office.  All  Managers  and  Quality  Monitoring  Officers  have  been  made 
aware there is a new policy that is being drafted and will be soon implemented. 

4.5  Although  covered  already  in  induction,  the  updated  draft  policy  has  been  sent  to  the  Training 
Manager for incorporation into the induction training for all new staff to start 20.02.2017 

4.6 Falls prevention/identification information has been further incorporated into the Care Planning and 
Risk Assessment training already booked for Quality Monitoring Officers, starting with training in Bristol 
w/c 13.02.2017. 

4.7 A falls poster has been developed and will be distributed to all offices alongside the new policy and 
procedure when it is completed. It is estimated that this will be w/c 20.02.2017.  

4.8 Work  around  the  Mental  Capacity  Act  has  been  completed  with  the team  in  Sale,  via  meetings, 
posters  and  leaflets.  The  national  roll  out  is  being  coordinated  by  Marketing  and  Communications 
Manager, 

.  

4.9 
18-22nd January 2016 to discuss the outcome of the inquest and reflective practice. 

 has met with the remaining Care Staff involved in Mr. Shepherd’s care between 

4.10 The Sale office care planning matrix has been reviewed by 
and brought up to date 
highlighting any care plan reviews that need to be completed. This is reviewed weekly by the Registered 
Manager. The next internal audit is due at the end of February/Beginning of March and the care planning 
matrix will be one of the focus areas for the team when auditing the branch. 

4.11 Due to different options that falls could be recorded under on the electronic Rota system (Cold 
Harbour and CM2000) – additional fields have been added to ensure that data can be collected and/or 
viewed more easily for people who might have had a fall. 

As an organisation, we sincerely regret the death of Mr. Shepherd, and will ensure that the appropriate 
lessons are learned within our service.  We will also redouble our efforts to ensure that communication 
and  partnership  working  between  ourselves  and  statutory  health  and  care  services  is  improved  to 
reduce the likelihood of future incidents. 

Yours sincerely 

Performance Director 

cc.  

, Managing Director 

 Area Manager (North West)

Related reports

Other reports by Nigel Meadows

See all →

More reports categorised “Community health care and emergency services related deaths”

See all →

Track Community health care and emergency services related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Community health care and emergency services 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.