Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2018

Joanne Richardson

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2018-0134, written 8 May 2018. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report8 May 2018
Reference2018-0134
DeceasedJoanne Richardson
CoronerRachael Griffith
Coroner areaDorset
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Organisation namedDorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust
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)

NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest.

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1. Mr Ron Shields, Chief Executive of Dorset Healthcare University NHS
Foundation Trust, 4-6 Sentinel House, Nuffield Industrial Estate, Poole
BH17 ORB

CORONER

I am Rachael Clare Griffin, Senior Coroner, for the Coroner Area of Dorset.

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 the 4 October 2017, an investigation was commenced into the death of
Joanne Elizabeth Richardson, born on the 3" February 1962.

The investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest on the 25% April 2018.
The Medical Cause of Death was:
la Hanging

The conclusion of the Inquest was suicide.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

On the 26th September 2017 the deceased, who was known to suffer with
mixed anxiety and depressive disorder, was found suspended by a ligature
which was attached around the leg of a bed and passed through the bannister
of the staircase at her home address at

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. During the inquest evidence was heard that:

vi.

vii.

Mrs Richardson was under the care of the Dorset Healthcare
University Foundation Trust (DHUFT) in relation to her mental
health. Her latest period of treatment began in June 2017. She
was under the care of the Community Mental Health Team
(CMHT) from that time until the time of her death on the 26%
September 2017. The CMHT had referred her to the West Dorset
Steps to Wellbeing Service for therapy.

She was assessed by the Psychiatrist from the CMHT on the 13%
July 2017, 8 August 2017 and 23" August 2017. The
Psychiatrist left the Trust and her case was then managed by a
Nurse Prescriber who assessed her on the 19 September 2017.
During these assessments, her risk of harm was deemed to be
low.

She was reviewed by the Steps to Wellbeing Service on the 21%
August 2017 when she was in low mood and had thoughts, but
no plans, of ending her life. The team felt that her risk was too
high for treatment by the Service and they therefore intended to
refer her back to CMHT. Mrs Richardson was only advised of this
in writing in a letter dated the 21% September.

The details of that assessment were never referred to the CMHT.
They were therefore not aware of how she presented or the risk
assessment made by the Steps to Wellbeing Service. This
information could have been very valuable to those in the CMHT
who assessed her on the 23 August and 19" September.

Evidence was given that some of the Steps to Wellbeing Service
have access to DHUFT records, namely RIO records, but not all
of them do. Evidence was further given that they do not write
entries in these records. Those carrying out assessments
therefore are not likely to have access to all information available
to DHUFT in relation to the patient.

Further on the 28" August 2017, Mrs Richardson contacted the
Crisis Team within DHUFT stating that she had suicidal thoughts
of ending her life by hanging. A call was made from the Crisis
Team to the CMHT and a Community Psychiatric Nurse was
spoken to. There was however no follow up after this, or any
written communication with anyone involved in her care.

Valuable information therefore, in relation to a patient, is not
being communicated to those involved in the care. There does
not appear to be joined up working between the different teams
within the Trust. This could therefore lead to inaccurate risk
assessments and a future death.

2. Ihave concerns with regard to the following:

i. That there is a lack of communication between the different
teams in DHUFT in respect of a patient’s care and as a result
there could be the death of a person in the future.

ii. I would therefore request that there is a review of the policies by
DHUFT in relation to the communication between the different
teams within DHUFT, particularly between the CMHT and the
Steps to Wellbeing Service.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion urgent action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I
believe you and/or 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, 3" July 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:

(1) Pe: Richardson’s husband

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.

Dated

Signed f (Backes —

Rachael C Griffin

st" May 2018

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 Dorset Healthcare University NHS Trust (PDF)
INHS

Dorset HealthCare

University
NHS Foundation Trust

Corporate Department
Sentinel House

Nuffield Road

Poole

Dorset BH17 ORB

Tel: 01202 277003
www.dorsethealthcare.nhs.uk

Private and Confidential

Mrs Rachael C Griffin

HM Senior Coroner for Dorset

The Coroner’s Office for the County of Dorset

Town Hall

Bournemouth 27 June 2018

BH2 6DY
Your Ref: RCG/02814-2017/SD

Dear Mrs Griffin
Re: Inquest touching the death of Joanne Elizabeth Richardson (deceased)

| write to you further to the above mentioned Inquest which concluded on 25th April 2018
when you raised concerns and the Regulation 28 Report dated 8th May 2018.

You raised three concerns. The first concern was that, critical patient information between
the Trust's Steps to Wellbeing Service (S2VW) in West Dorset and the Trust's Community
Mental Health Team (CMHT) had not been shared. Secondly that patient information is
recorded in two different electronic patient information systems and that not all staff have
access or regularly review information in each of these systems. Thirdly that Mrs
Richardson had not been followed up in a timely manner by the CMHT, after making
contact with the Crisis Team. You requested a review of the policies regarding
communication between teams, in particular between the CMHT and S2W.

We have reviewed our processes and policies regarding communication and joined up
working between CMHTs and S2W services alongside relevant legislation and guidance.

Currently administrators check both electronic patient information systems — IAPTus for
$2W for all referrals received by the CMHTs and Rio for S2W and CMHT teams to see if
the patient is known to either service. Read only access for both systems are available to
administrators and team leads. If the patient has a history with local mental health
setvices, this information is copied by an administrator onto the S2W clinical notes and

Better Every Day

Our vision is to lead and inspire through excellence, compassion and expertise in all we do

makes this available to the allocated assessing clinician, prior to them assessing the
patient.

After the assessment, a copy of the assessment letter (summarising presenting problems,
agreed treatment plan, risk summary) is copied to the other teams who are involved with
the patient. Any significant changes to the treatment plan that take place during contacts
with teams are communicated to the other teams involved.

it is also standard practice that at the point of discharge, for a patient who is under the
care of both services for a discharge letter to be sent to the other team and GP. We have
reinforced the expectation that, when a patient is being seen by both teams, a discussion
is had between S2W and CMHT clinicians, prior to discharge to agree an appropriate
discharge plan. Furthermore, we have reinforced the expectation that treatment decisions
are communicated to patients face to face or over the telephone in order to allow
collaboration and feedback. These decisions can then be formalized in a written letter to
the patient, but this should only happen after a discussion has been held with the patient
and other team.

In addition to the communication processes described above we introduced the following
measures to aid closer working between teams. On IAPTus (S2W) a label has been
identified that will be a visual aid on the personal information page of the record indicating
that a patient is also known to the CMHT. The Rio (CMHT) system does not have this
functionality. However, a report has been developed that identifies patients who are under
the care of both services.

if there is a significant change to a client’s risk, indicating that there is a significant risk of
harm, the allocated clinician will share this information with the other service in a timely
manner, by telephone in the first instance. If it has not been possible to speak via
telephone then this information will be shared via email using the team referral inbox that
is screened daily. This will be used to share urgent information pertaining to a client's risk
and then be uploaded to Rio or IAPTus respectively.

The CMHT hold weekly multidisciplinary team meetings to review cases. A S2W
practitioner is able to phone into a set slot at a CMHT / team meeting. This enables case
discussions and review of risks for those people who are under the care of both services.
Any discussions will be documented in the CMHT team meeting minutes and both clinical
systems.

With regard to your concern about timely follow-up, our Crisis Teams inform CMHTs by
email when they have had contact with one of their patients. The Root Cause Analysis
review highlighted that there was a failure to record the CMHT assessment and care plan
in response to receiving information about Mrs Richardson’s contact with the CHTT.

Better Every Day

Our vision is to lead and inspire through excellence, compassion and expertise in all we do

Emails from the CHTT are sent to CMHT clinicians involved in the patient’s care and to a
generic CMHT account that is monitored by the administration team. They ensure that a
clinical member of the team is aware of the message. The need to act on such information
and to document decisions on the electronic record has been reinforced within the CMHT
involved through discussion of this omission in care. This learning has been disseminated
to all CMHTs across the Trust.

| hope that the actions outlined provide assurance that the Trust has investigated this
matter thoroughly, communicated this learning and new processes to staff, and introduced

additional measures to ensure that communication of clinical and risk information between
CMHTs and S2W in Dorset is reliable, clear and timely.

If you have any queries at all, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Yours sincerely

Ron Shields
Chief Executive

Better Every Day

Our vision is to lead and inspire through excellence, compassion and expertise in all we do

Related reports

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Dorset Healthcare University NHS Foundation 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.