Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2017

Natalie Thornton

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2017-0030, written 6 Feb 2017. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report6 Feb 2017
Reference2017-0030
DeceasedNatalie Thornton
CoronerSimon Nelson
Coroner areaManchester North
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
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) 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1.  Secretary of State Department of Health            

1 

CORONER 

I am Simon Nelson Senior  Coroner for the Coroner area of Manchester North 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009 and Regulations 28 
and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 
On  the  22nd  of  January  2015  I  commenced  an  investigation  into  the  death  of  Natalie  Ann  Thornton  then 
aged 29 years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 2 February 2017. The conclusion of 
the inquest was Natural Causes–the medical cause of death being diabetic ketoacidosis            

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH 

Natalie  Thornton  was  diagnosed  with  type  1  diabetes  at  the  age  of  3  years.  Her  long-standing 
diabetic control was described as ‘brittle’ with history of recurrent diabetic ketoacidosis exacerbated 
by  diabetic  nephropathy  leading  to  chronic  kidney  disease;  advanced  diabetic  eye  disease  and 
delayed stomach emptying. Her blood glucose control had always been highly variable. 

With a view to improving the quality of her life it was decided on the 2 December 2014 to start her 
on insulin pump therapy for which she was deemed competent and adequately prepared. 

At  some  time  after  11:00  hours  on  18  January  2015  Natalie  awoke  and  complained  of  feeling 
unwell.  She  subsequently  collapsed  in  the  bathroom;  deteriorated  rapidly  and  by  the  time  of  the 
arrival  of  the  first  paramedic  at  approximately  14:44  hours  CPR  was  being  undertaken  without 
there  being  any  electrical  activity  in  the  heart.  The  fact  of  death  was  subsequently  confirmed  at 
15:32 hours that day 

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.  Concern  was  expressed  as  to  the  adequacy  of  the  monitoring  and  review  of  blood  sugar 
levels/data  generated  following  the  initial  use  of  the  pump  provided  by  the  Salford  Royal 
Trust  which  provided  Natalie’s  equipment  and  had  been  caring  for  her  over  many  years. 
More  particularly  trends  were  not  analysed.  Whilst  noting  that  the  introduction  of  insulin 
pump  therapy  was  deemed  an  evolutionary  process  no  formal  Pump  Agreement  was  in 
place at the time although such  Agreements have now been implemented  

2.  From the evidence given by the expert Consultant 

 it would appear that 
the  level  of  support  for  insulin  pump  users  nationally  is  variable.  Whether  the  need  for 
consistency  and  minimum  standards  should  be  addressed  by  Regional  Centres  of 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Excellence would be a matter for the Department to consider.  

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe each of you respectively 
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           . 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 the following Interested Persons namely:- 

1.  Insulet Corporation 
2.  North West Ambulance Service 
3.  Family of Natalie Ann Thornton 
4.  Salford Royal Foundation Trust 

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 from. He may send a 
copy  of  this  report  to  any  person  who  he  believes  may  find  it  usefulor  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 

Date: 6 February 2017                                                                                                  Signed: Simon Nelson 
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 Department of Health (PDF)
FromNicola BlackwoodMP
ParliamentaryUnderSecretaryofState forPublicHealth andInnovation
Department
RichmondHouse
of Health
79 Whitehall
London
SWIA 2NS
Our Ref: PFD-1074069
020 72104850
Simon Nelson
HM Senior Coroner
HM Coroner’s Court
The Phoenix Centre
L/Cpl Stephen Shaw MC Way
19 APR 2017
Heywood
OL1O 1LR
Thank you for your letter of9 February 2017 to the Secretary ofState for Health
about the death ofMiss Natalie Thornton. I am responding as the Minister with
responsibility for diabetes at the Department ofHealth.
I was saddened to read ofthe circumstances surrounding Miss Thornton’s death.
Please pass my condolences to her family and loved ones.
Your report explained that Miss Thornton, who had type 1 diabetes, had begun
insulin pump therapy several weeks before her death.
At inquest, concerns were expressed about the adequacy ofthe monitoring and
analysis ofthe trends from the data generated following initial use ofthe pump, and
the lack of a formal pump agreement.
My officials have sought advice from NHS England, NHS Improvement and the
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) with regard to the level of
support for insulin pump users nationally, and whether the need for consistency and
minimum standards should be addressed by regional centres ofexcellence.
It may be helpful ifI explain what guidance is available on the use and management
ofinsulin pumps for people with diabetes. NICE advises that it published clinical
guideline, ‘Type 1 diabetes in adults: diagnosis and management’ (NG17) in August
2016. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng17.
This includes recommendations on insulin pumps that were incorporated from the
technology appraisal, ‘C’ontinuous subcutaneous insulin infusionfor the treatment of
diabetes mellitus’ (TA151), published in July 2008.
www.nice.org.uk/guidance/tal5l.
The guidance includes the following:
‘1.3 It is recommended that CSII therapy be initiated only by a trained
specialist team, which should normally comprise a physician with a specialist
interest in insulin pump therapy, a diabetes specialist nurse and a dietitian.
Specialist teams should provide structured education programmes and advice
on diet, lifestyle and exercise appropriate for people using CSII.
1.4 Following initiation in adults and children 12 years and older, CSII therapy
should only be continued ifit results in a sustained improvement in glycaemic
control, evidenced by a fall in HbAlc levels, or a sustained decrease in the rate
ofhypoglycaemic episodes. Appropriate targets for such improvements should
be set by the responsible physician, in discussion with the person receiving the
treatment or their carer.’
The guidance does not make specific recommendations on support for insulin pump
users. However, there are general recommendations in the guideline on early care
plans, support and individualised care, as well as education and information provision
for people with type 1 diabetes, which applies to pump users and non-pump users
alike.
NICE advises that there are no plans to review the guidance at this time. However,
NICE will retain information on the concerns highlighted in your Report for
consideration when the guidance is next considered for review.
You ask the Department to consider whether the need for consistency and minimum
standards for insulin pump users would be addressed by the establishment ofregional
centres ofexcellence. NHS England advises that such a move would be a significant
undertaking, involving infrastructure and workforce changes and financial
investment, and there is need initially to understand better the extent ofvariation.
NHS England is currently in discussion with NHS Digital about a possible extension
ofthe National Diabetes Audit to include a spotlight audit on accessibility and
outcomes oftreatment using an insulin pump and continuous glucose monitoring. If
the proposal for a spotlight audit is agreed, NHS England would be in a position to
better assess the extent to which there is variation in standards ofcare for insulin
pump users.
Department
of Health
You will appreciate this work is at an early stage but I hope you are assured that
action is underway to gain a better understanding ofthe extent ofvariation across the
country in this specific area ofdiabetes care.
In addition, NHS Improvement advises that it is in the process ofappointing a
Clinical Lead for diabetes inpatient care for the Getting it Right First Time
programme, www.improvernent.nhs.uk/news-alerts/getting-it-right-first-time
recruits-new-clinical-leads/. It is expected that the Clinical Lead will be in post within
the next four months. The Clinical Lead will undertake a review ofinsulin pumps
and the current support for users, which is expected to be completed towards the
latter part of2018. NHS Improvement is able to update you on the outcomes ofthis
review in due course ifthat would be helpful.
Finally, I would like to assure you that we are working hard to improve outcomes and
quality oflife for those living with diabetes or those who will develop it in the
coming years. Once a patient has been diagnosed with diabetes, it is vital to ensure
they can manage their condition as effectively as possible.
We have made achieving a measurable reduction in variation in the management and
care ofpeople with diabetes by 2020 a mandate objective for the NHS within the
lifetime ofthis Parliament.
Building on its National Diabetes Prevention Programme, NHS England is
developing a diabetes management and care programme aimed at reducing variation
and improving outcomes for people with diabetes.
NHS England is making an additional £40 million available from 2017/18 to support
delivery ofthe programme which will focus on four areas: reducing variation in the
achievement ofthe three NICE treatment targets; improving take up of structured
education; improving access to multi-disciplinary foot care teams for people with
diabetic foot disease; and improving access to specialist inpatient support.
Thank you for bringing the circumstances ofMiss Thornton’s death to our attention.
I hope this information is useful.
NICOLA BLACKWOOD

Related reports

Other reports by Simon Nelson

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.