Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2017
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2017-0392, written 13 Nov 2017. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 13 Nov 2017 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2017-0392 |
| Deceased | Jeff Antwis |
| Coroner | John Ellery |
| Coroner area | Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Railway related deaths |
| Organisation named | Shropshire Community Health NHS Trust · South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
1
2
3
4
REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:
1. Mr Neil Carr OBE
The Chief Executive of South Staffordshire and Shropshire NHS Trust
Trust Headquarters
St George's Hospital
Corporation Street
Stafford ST16 3SR
CORONER
I am John Penhale Ellery, Senior Coroner for the coroner area of Shropshire,
Telford & Wrekin
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.
INVESTIGATION and INQUEST
On 31st January 2017 1 commenced an investigation into the death of Jeff David
ANTWIS, 14 years of age. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest
on 9th November 2017. The conclusion of the inquest was suicide.
CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
On Monday 30th January 2017 at approximately 05:30 hours a train travelling
south along the railway line at Harlescott level crossing Shrewsbury struck the
deceased causing serious head injuries. He was transferred by ambulance to
the Royal Stoke University Hospital where at 17:18 hours he was confirmed
dead. The deceased was a vulnerable teenager with a diagnosis of asperger’s
syndrome with a history of self-harm escalating to suicide attempts. In answers
to a miracle question he indicated that he wished to die. An urgent medical
review was appropriate but not carried out however it cannot be said to have
caused or contributed to the 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) Following an urgent referral by Jeff’s GP to (the then) Shropshire CAMHS on
the 10th January 2017 a timely response was made with an initial
appointment with a mental health practitioner taking place on the 12th. A
further appointment was arranged for the 25th January (an earlier date
clashed with an existing medical appointment) and in the meantime Jeff
was given a miracle question to complete.
(2) Jeff answered the miracle question indicating that he wished to die. He
passed it to his mother who immediately contacted the mental health
practitioner who in turn referred it and the initial assessment to a
consultant physiatrist for review. The consultant physiatrist did not
consider the matter urgent and arranged for a routine medical review for
the 17th March 2017.
(3) At the second meeting on the 25th January 2017 Jeff and his mother were
informed of the appointment for the 17th March 2017. Jeff’s mother
immediately raised concerns and asked for it to be brought forward. She
was told she would have to write in and make a complaint. This was a time
sensitive situation adding to the problem without resolving it.
(4) On the 30th January 2017 Jeff killed himself on the railway line.
(5) Independent expert evidence from a child and adolescent consultant
physiatrist indicated that Jeff should have been offered an urgent medical
review appointment for the 27th January 2017 (i.e. within 7 days of the
internal referral to the consultant physiatrist) and not, as a routine
appointment, the 17th March 2017. It cannot be said that such earlier
appointment would have addressed Jeff’s problems and altered his wish to
die but it is it possible that earlier intervention may have lifted his spirits
and not, according to his mother, ‘wilted’. It undoubtedly would have
helped and at least been an earlier step in seeking to help Jeff.
(6) Other matters of concern arose from the evidence. The mental health
practitioner:
a) Was aware of the deliberate self-harm protocol but not its content.
b) Carried out a risk assessment on a subjective basis without
reference to any known definition e.g. serious or significant.
c) Had no mechanism for referring back to the consultant physiatrist
appointment, whether she agreed with the request or not.
(7) As stated Jeff had a diagnosis of asperger’s syndrome with autistic
spectrum disorder. Concerns were raised to what extent these conditions
have may have masked Jeff’s suicidal ideation on presentation and to what
extent, if it is the case, they were recognized.
(8) From evidence given at the inquest it is clear that the provision of child and
adolescent mental health service is in transition, having moved from
Shropshire CAMHS to part of South Staffordshire and Shropshire NHS Trust.
Certain actions are already being taken and these concerns are raised so
that a holistic approach can be taken and fed in to what is already an
ongoing wider review.
6
7
8
9
ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN
In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe
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 8th January 2018. 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
I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following
Interested Persons
, Solicitors for the family
, father of deceased
Mills & Reeve, Solicitors for South Staffordshire and Shropshire NHS Trust
, Consultant Child and Adolescent Physiatrist
, Director of Shropshire Public Health
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.
13th November 2017
J.P. Ellery
Senior Coroner
Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin Area
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.
INHS South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Trust Headquarters St George’s Hospital Corporation Street Stafford ST16 3SR Tel: 0300 790 7000 Ext 8578 Fax: 01785 783217 J.P. Ellery Senior Coroner HM Coroner's Services Shirehall ~ 5 JAN 2018 Abbey Foregate Shrewsbury Shropshire; SY2 6ND 3" December 2017 Dear Mr Ellery RE: Jeff David ANTWIS Report to Prevent Future Deaths Thank you for your letter dated 13" November 2017, reporting a matter to us, in accordance with Regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroner’s (investigations) Regulations 2013. As identified in your letter South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust were not providing CAMHS services within Shropshire at the time of Jeff's death therefore South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust were not in a position to have carried out an investigation into the care of Jeff prior to his death. The Serious Incident Investigation presented at the inquest was carried out by Shropshire Community Health NHS Trust who were providing CAMHS services in Shropshire in January 2017. May | take this opportunity to reassure you that South Staffordshire and Shropshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust Emotional Wellbeing Service have received a copy of the Serious Incident Investigation Report from Shropshire Community Health NHS Trust and in addition are taking action in response to the concerns you raised at the inquest as follows: ae Positively * = 4% Different @ | | | | Following an urgent referral by Jeff's GP to (the then) Shropshire CAMHS on the 10th January 2017 a timely response was made with an initial appointment with a mental health practitioner taking place on the 12". A further appointment was arranged for the 25" January (an earlier date clashed with an existing medical appointment) and in the meantime Jeff was given a miracle question to complete. Jeff answered the miracle question indicating that he wished to die. He passed it to his mother who immediately contacted the mental health practitioner who in turn referred it and the initial assessment to a consultant physiatrist for review. The consultant physiatrist did not consider the matter urgent and arranged for a routine medical review for the 17th March 2017. At the second meeting on the 25th January 2017 Jeff and his mother were informed of the appointment for the 17th March 2017. Jeff's mother immediately raised concerns and asked for it to be brought forward. She was told she would have to write in and make a complaint. This was a time sensitive situation adding to the problem without resolving it. On the 30" January 2017 Jeff killed himself on the railway line. Independent expert evidence from a child and adolescent consultant physiatrist indicated that Jeff should have been offered an urgent medical review appointment for the 27th January 2017 (i.e. within 7 days of the internal referral to the consultant physiatrist) and not, as a routine appointment, the 17th March 2017. It cannot be said that such earlier appointment would have addressed Jeff's problems and altered his wish to die but it is it possible that earlier intervention may have lifted his spirits and not, according to his mother, ‘wilted’. It undoubtedly would have helped and at least been an earlier step in seeking to help Jeff. ‘ Other matters of concern arose from the evidence. The mental health practitioner: a) Was aware of the deliberate self-harm protocol but not its content. b) Carried out a risk assessment on a subjective basis without reference to any known definition e.g. serious or significant. c) Had no mechanism for referring back to the consultant physiatrist appointment, whether she agreed with the request or not. As stated Jeff had a diagnosis of Asperger’s Syndrome with autistic spectrum disorder. Concerns were raised to what extent these conditions have may have masked Jeff’s suicidal ideation on presentation and to what extent, if it is the case, they were recognised. From evidence given at the inquest it is clear that the provision of child and adolescent mental health service is in transition, having moved from Shropshire CAMHS to part of South Staffordshire and Shropshire NHS Trust. Certain actions are already being taken and these concerns are raised so that a holistic approach can be taken and fed in to what is already an ongoing wider review. Following discussions and feedback from the clinical leads and operational management team in the Specialist & Family Directorate, BBs Positively vn Ae Different @ Since the service transferred to our organisation in May 2017 we have been working with the staff to improve the access and effectiveness of services provided. In response to the concerns that you identified the following actions have already occurred: ACTION ALREADY TAKEN e single point of access to the service was implemented on 4" Dec 2017 to ensure that young people’s needs can be appropriately identified at the point of referral and an appropriate, timely response provided (point 1 and 7). Introduction of standardised validated clinical risk assessment tool with associated pathway to enable timely robust response to changes in risk level (Also points 2, 3, 5, 6 & 7) e One assessment appointment each week is ring fenced for urgent assessments in each Consultant Child & Adolescent Psychiatrist job plan to ensure that young people presenting in crisis are provided with urgent psychiatric review (points 2,4, 5 & 7) e We have commenced reviewing the caseloads of all practitioners within the service to ensure that all young people within the service have appropriate care plans and risk assessments in place (points 2, 3, 5, 6 & 7) this will be completed by 31 March 2018. e When a young person is accepted within the service, a clear pathway for their care is identified, this enables the case holding clinician to access additional support for example, psychology, family therapy consultant psychiatry (Also points 2, 3, 6 & 7) Healios are delivering online therapeutic interventions as part of core MH service (point 8). e Escalation processes have been agreed within clinical pathways so that urgent psychiatric reviews can be obtained when concerns are raised (points 2, 4,5 & 7) e Reflective learning/OD sessions for the clinical teams are taking place to improve communication between members and improved team based working (points 2, 5, 6 & 7) The Home Treatment / crisis team now respond to young people who present in crisis and offer additional support within the home during episodes of crisis (Also points 3, 4 & 7) e implementation of electronic patient records, to ensure that young people’s current and historical risk history is available to all practitioners working with the young person, including “out of hours”. (points 3, 4 & 7) e Bespoke training on all assessment documentation used within the electronic patient record system is being provided to all clinical staff to ensure consistent use (points 3, 5, 6 & 7) e New services are available from Kooth (open access online service for young people 11-25) and The Childrens Society (open access drop-in service for CYP, Positively “ae Different ® families and professionals) in order to provide a wider range of service for young people. (point 8) FURTHER ACTIONS TO BE COMPLETED e By end of March 2018 — Completion of the review of ail cases currently open to Mental Health services to ensure recording appropriately reflects levels of need to improve capacity planning based on need/priority (points1, 2, 3, 5 & 7) e By end of June 2018 — Completion of appointment to vacant posts within the Mental Health service to ensure skill mix and capacity in place to better meet needs of children and young people. (Posts are currently out to advert) (points1, 2, 3,5 & 7) e By end of June 2018 - Development of a joint crisis pathway between adult and children’s mental health services to improve the response further for children and young people in crisis (also points 2, 3, 5 & 7). | hope this response helps to address your concerns. However if you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact me Yours sincerely Neil Carr Chief Executive ex as Positively “= 4° Different ®
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Shropshire Community Health 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.