Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2017
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2017-0156, written 16 May 2017. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 16 May 2017 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2017-0156 |
| Deceased | Ruth Milne |
| Coroner | Paul Cooper |
| Coroner area | South Lincolnshire |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
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.
PS Cooper Senior Coroner for South Lincolnshire REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: Lincolnshire Community Health Service NHS Trust CORONER | am PS Cooper, Senior Coroner for South Lincolnshire 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. http://www. legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5/paragraph/7 http://www. legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/part/7/made INVESTIGATION and INQUEST On 09/07/2015 | commenced an investigation into the death of Ruth Milne, 83 . The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 11 May 2017. The conclusion of the inquest was Natural causes. The deceased died in the Pilgrim Hospital, Fishtoft, Boston on 10/6/2015. Safeguarding have now identified that continuity of patient care by various nurses attending and the lack of expertise in the weeks immediately preceding her death did not assist. The Inquest focused on the standard of care with family members and other medical staff referring to strong unpleasant odours since January 2015 to death and live maggots being seen under her skin by the hospital on the day of her admission that went unnoticed by the GP/nurses previously. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Deceased admitted at 1205hrs on 09/06/2015 with severe sepsis due to both legs skin tissues (legs) being infectious. Her multi organ failure decompensate in septic shock. She received antibiotics IV Cefuroxime and IV Metronidazole and IV flyj i increasing BP. She died within 24hrs of admission. Death confirmed at ons: lll stated in her opinion cause of death was due to 1a Multi-organ failure 1b Septic shock 1c Leg abscess 2 CCF, CKD. 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 lack of continuity and the appropriateness of the medical staff despatched by the GP’s a: Hawthorn Medical Practice, Skegness. The Safeguarding report a ohnstone Head of Safeguarding dated November 2015 identified this. (2) Lincolnshire Police also investigated for an act of criminality. (3) | really need to know if all the Action Plan, Monitoring and recommendations’ (on page 11 & 12) of the safeguarding report have now been implemented and if not why not. Unit 1, Gilbert Drive, Endeavour Park, Wyberton Fen, Boston, Lincolnshrire, PE21 7TQ Tel 01522 553873/553374 | Fax 01522516717 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe you Lincolnshire Register Office 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 1 August 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 the following iS Lincolnshire Community Health Service NHS Trust. | have also sent it t (Son) who may find it useful or of interest. | 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. Dated 16 May 20 Signature. Zi Senior Coroner for South Lincolnshire Unit 1, Gilbert Drive, Endeavour Park, Wyberton Fen, Boston, Lincolnshrire, PE21 7TQ Tel 01522 553873/553374 | Fax 01522516717
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.
13 JUL 2017 NHS Lincolnshire Community Our Ref: REG28/KT ; Your Ref: PSC/AR 592-2016 ; Health Services Please ask for: NHS Trust Telephone} E-mail address| Beech House 18" July 2017 Witham Park Waterside South HM Acting Senior Coroner Lincoln Unit 1 LN5 7JH Gilbert Drive Tel: 01522 308998 Endeavour Park Calls via Text Relay are welcome Boston PE21 7TQ Fax: www lincolnshirecommunityhealthservices.nhs.uk Reference : Regulation 28 report in respect of the late Ruth MILNE Dear Mr Cooper This is the response on behalf of Lincolnshire Community Health Services in respect of the Regulation 28 report received dated 16" May 2017, with reference to Matters of Concern Point 3. You make reference to the Action Plan, Monitoring and Recommendations’ of the safeguarding report ( pages 11 and 12) and the requirement to provide you with information as to whether these have been implemented or not. I can report as follows: Ongoing actions Page.11 ( all now complete) 1, Ambulatory patients to be managed through case management identifying appropriate management through clinics and evaluated through care plan There are now two leg ulcer clinics held 5 days a week within Skegness and one clinic held 5 days a week in Mablethorpe. There is also a plan to hold a Saturday clinic from late July to September to provide extra service provision for holiday makers. Provision of care to these patients is evaluated as part of care planning. 2. Integrated support/review with specialist nurses i.e. heart failure, lymphoedema and continence Where an integrated/joint visit is required these take place. Specialist nurses share office accommodation with the community nursing team so there are well established channels of communication between specialist and community staff to ensure patient needs are reviewed ensuring the correct specialists are involved. 3. Review of caseloads and utilisation of ambulatory clinics Clinics are held as identified in point 1. There is also a caseload review tool that has been implemented since this case which has been implemented across LCHS (please see Appendix A) Chair: Elaine Baylis, QPM. Chief Executive: Andrew Morgan 4. Allocation of case managers within the team Each GP practice has an allocated case manager and each case manager is now allocated a day a week to go through their caseloads using the tool (Appendix A). This is undertaken patient by patient. Care delivery is checked against the pathways in the community catalogue to ensure that the patient is receiving the appropriate care and visits and also identifying if over visiting is an issue. This weekly undertaking ensures cleansing and discharging of patients and also checks that patients are not discharged too early. There have been a lot of recent journal articles on the development of caseload dependency / complexity tools for the community, as until recently many of those developed were for secondary care use. A good document from this year is by NHS Improvement ‘An improvment resource for the district nursing service’ and gives examples of case studies where patient complexity tools have been implemented - this followed on the back of the work from NICE and other sources. As a result LCHS undertook a project looking at the use of a dependency tool. Two senior community nurses were asked to implement this within the teams and its use in plotting visits (Appendix B ). The action plan is relation this project , as you will see is very current and as yet hasn't been signed off as the project is not yet at it’s final stage ( Appendix C) 17. Recommendations, Page 11 ( all now complete) ‘17. 1 Review of development of true case management within the Skegness community team including the integration of specialist nurses As identified above in points 2&4 17.2 Team dynamic, to review the current culture of the team including the integration of specialist nurses Review of clinical leadership to the community team and to develop appropriate support mechanisms The Clinical Team Leader (CTL) in post at the time of Mrs Milne’s death has now left the Trust. With the appointment of a new CTL into that post the team have evolved, progressed and become more cohesive. Communication has enhanced. Clinical and safeguarding supervision takes place on a regular basis and the team recognise when support is required and access that support readily. The team also receive annual level 3 safeguarding training and there is a deputy named nurse for safeguarding allocated to each team to provide the supervision. Adult safeguarding competencies have also been introduced for the band 7 nurses. Monthly operation meetings now take place which include the Heads of Clinical Services, Matrons and Clinical Team Leads. As stated previously there is much more integration of specialist nurses as they now share office accommodation with the team which facilitates a higher engagement in regular discussion. 17.3 Carry out an in depth review of the teams’ activity in relation to the transient population and their long term conditions both internal and external to Lincolnshire A piece of work internally has been completed to align population to both a case manager and the rest of the team. In addition, LCHS employed an external consultancy company to look at productivity in the trust as awhole and this also included work specific to community team’s activity in relation to population and condition taking into account the transient population footfall. This then resulted in workforce modelling to ensure this reflected patient need. In terms of the Skegness team the staffing model that was proposed by the review has been fully implemented. Chair: Elaine Baylis, QPM Chief Executive: Andrew Morgan 17.4 Staff needing competencies around lower limb care signing off to be supported by the tissue viability associate nurse ; Staff can access a “lower limb course” and whilst this is highly recommended it is not mandated. All training needs are fed into a centralised training needs analysis, this then informs a competency matrix which identifies which staff require training in a specific area. If staff do not attend the “lower limb course” then training is provided within the workplace and sign off is supported by the tissue viability associate nurse. Staff within the Skegness team have received bespoke training of this nature. There are also two documents that support lower limb care these being : e The Clinical Guidelines for The Assessment and Management of Lower Limb Ulceration within Adult Community Services (Appendix D) e Standard Operating Procedure for Use of Handheld Dopplex Vascular Doppler Ultrasound Within Adult Community Services, including competencies (Appendix E) Action plan (all complete) The action plan covered 5 specific issues e Case management of patients on caseload- covered above at 2&4 e Team dynamics covered above at 17.2 © Clinical leadership — covered above at 17.2 ¢ Capacity within the team to respond to transient population with long term conditions- covered above at 17.3 e Individual Competency in relation to lower limb care- covered above in 17.5 Monitoring arrangements (Page 12) The action plan and outcomes are monitored as identified in the report. In addition LCHS have recently introduced an action plan tracker. All actions from an action plan are added to the tracker for monitoring through to completion. Any stated evidence on the action plan is required in order to be marked as complete. The tracker headings are as below: Recommendation | Action | Responsible | Responsible Target } Completéd | Evidence |” : Link to officer forsign off | date evidence | The tracker is presented at the monthly LCHS Patient Safety and Safeguarding Committee to ensure that target dates are on track and that required evidence is available. | hope that the above response and attached appendices provide the assurance that the recommendations and action plan have been fully implemented and monitored. Chair: Elaine Baylis, QPM Chief Executive: Andrew Morgan If you require any further information in regards to this Regulation 28 report, please do not hesitate to contact me Yours Sincerely LOaS— Kim Todd, Practitioner Performance Manager, LCHS Chair: Elaine Baylis, QPM Chief Executive: Andrew Morgan
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.