Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2018

Deidre Harvey

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2018-0266, written 8 Aug 2018. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report8 Aug 2018
Reference2018-0266
DeceasedDeidre Harvey
CoronerChristopher Woolley
Coroner areaSouth Wales Central
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Mental Health related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published5

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.

REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

The Secretary of State for Health
The Minister of Health, Welsh Assembly Government
The Chief Executive, Cwm Taf University Health Board
The Editor, British National Formulary

The President, The British Association of Dermatologists
The President, The Royal College of Psychiatrists

PAUPwna

CORONER

! am Christopher John Woolley, Assistant Coroner, for the Coroner area of South Wales
Central

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.

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

In April 2017 | commenced an investigation into the death of Deidre Harvey. The
investigation concluded at the end of the inquest where | sat with a jury between 16"
and 27" July 2017.The medical cause of death was: 1.a Hanging. The jury returned a
conclusion as follows: Accident contributed to by neglect.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

Deidre Harvey had had a tong history of bipolar disorder, having first undergone
treatment in the 1990s. She had a long period of stability in the community between
2006 and 2016 but on October 13 2016 her condition worsened and she was admitted
to the Mental Health Unit, Royal Glamorgan Hospital. From admissions she was
transferred to Ward 22 on 15! November 2016. She was discharged on 21: November
2016 but took an overdose on 24'* November and a serious suicide attempt on 8"
December. She was again admitted to the admissions ward after two days | HDU, and
then on 4" January 2017 was transferred to Ward 22 again. She remained on that ward
until her death on 10!" April 2017. She was made subject to a Section 3 Mental Health
Act order on 21% February 2017 and this was continued until her death. Deidre suffered
from several concomitant physical condition including Systemic Lupus Erythematosus
for which she was prescribed the drug Hydroxychloroquine. This had been
administer34ed to her at 200 mg per day from mid-November 2016 until her death. At
the time of her death blood analysis showed that she had accumulated toxic levels of
this drug in her system (more than 15 mg/DL which is above the level at which cardiac
arrhythmias have been noted (3.6 mg/L) and death (7.5 mg/DL). In the event however
the pathologist did not attribute Deidre's death to Hydroxychloroquine toxicity.

Deidre’s mood from January to April was fluctuating. The team on Ward 22 also
struggled to get her hyponatraemia under control and this compromised both the
individual mood stabilisers and anti-depressants they were able to give, as well as the

quantity at which they were able to give them. The team said they planned to give ECT
but this had not been administered by the 10! April 2017. While the Hydroxychloroquine
continued to be administered there was no dialogue between the mental health ward
and the consultants treating her other conditions (dermatology and gynaecology). In
February 2017 Deidre cut her wrists (13/2) and on the 20" February 2017 she made a
disclosure to a nurse that she had attempted to hang herself with a dressing gown cord.
She was placed on a Section 3 Mental Health Act order on the 21% February. In March
Deidre and her daughter both reported that she was putting on a front, or putting on a
mask, Her mood fluctuated but she made comments that she wanted to end it. On 10!
April 2017 she appeadrd to be brighter and looking forward to going home. She went to
the communal bathroom on the ward and told staff that she was having a shower at 8.40
am. At 8.55 am staff went into the bathroom and found that Deidre had died after
attaching a ligature to her neck. The ligature used was a dressing gown cord which had
previously been removed from her after a threat she made to hang herself with it. The
cause of death was given by the pathologist as 1a Hanging.
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. ~

Secretary of State for Health

1. The inquest heard that patients on Mental Health Units often have significant physical
problems which are treated by outside consultants, who may have little input into their
care on the ward or may not even know they are there. In this inquest the consultant
psychiatrist treating Deidre was not aware of the potentially toxic effects of the drug for
her lupus.

The Coroner is concerned that outside consultants should have a more active input into
the care of the mental health patient on a Mental Health Unit, in order that their expertise
and knowledge is available to the treating consultant psychiatrist.

2. The inquest heard that an obvious ligature point was identified in September 2016 in
the Mental Health Unit, and yet bureaucratic processes meant that approval for funding
the rectification of this ligature point was held up for months, with staff having to
“manage” the risk.

The Coroner is concerned that there should be an expedited process for rectifying
obvious ligature points on Mental Health Units

Minister for Health, Welsh Assembly Government

1. The inquest heard that patients on Mental Health Units often have significant physical
problems which are treated by outside consultants, who may have little input into their
care on the unit or may not even know they are there. In this inquest the consultant
psychiatrist treating Deidre was not aware of the potentially toxic effects of the drug for
her lupus.

The Coroner is concerned that outside consultants should have a more active input into
the care of the mental health patient on a Mental Health Unit, in order that their expertise
and knowledge is available to the treating consultant psychiatrist.

2. The inquest heard that an obvious ligature point was identified in September 2016 in
the Mental Health Unit, and yet bureaucratic processes meant that approval for funding
the rectification of this ligature point was held up for months, with staff having to

to

“manage” the risk.

The Coroner is concerned that there should be an expedited process for rectifying
obvious ligature points on Mental Health Units

Chief Executive - Cwm Taf University Health Board

1. The inquest heard of the Pod system on the Mental Health Unit in which items of
danger to patients were deposited (and then possibly returned to the patient). There was
no evidence of any effective system to identify who had what item, and when.

The Coroner is concerned that there should be an effective system to check on what is
taken from a patient and then later returned to a patient.

2. The inquest heard that patients on Mental Health Units often have significant physical
problems which are treated by outside consultants, who may have little input into their
care on the unit or may not even know they are there. In this inquest the consultant
psychiatrist treating Deidre was not aware of the potentially toxic effects of the drug for
her lupus.

The Coroner is concerned that outside consultants should have a more active input into
the care of the mental health patient on a Mental Health Unit, in order that their expertise
and knowledge is available to the treating consultant psychiatrist.

3. The inquest heard that there was confusion between staff on the Mental Health Unit
and the Community Psychiatric Nurse over management of risk for a patient admitted on
the Mental Health Unit, with the result that responsibility for a Risk assessment might not
be recognised.

The Coroner is concerned that there should be proper management and dissemination

of risk management policies to frontline staff to avoid any confusion

Editor British National Formulary

Hydroxychloroquine

1. The expert evidence given was that Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) is not contra-indicated
in Appendix 1 of the BNF for anti-epileptic drugs. The manufacturer's leaflet however
does contain a caution against using HCQ alongside anti-epileptic drugs. It is
acknowledged that the text of the BNF does indicate that HCQ should not be used in
case of neurological disorders (including epilepsy) but this does not catch patients like
Dee who was on an anti-epileptic drug (Lamotrigine) for her bipolar condition but was
not epileptic.

The coroner is concerned that the BNF might not fully describe the risk to patients taking
Lamotrigine (or drugs of similar class or composition) alongside Hydroxychloroquine.

Royal College of Psychiatrists

Hydroxychloraquine

1. The evidence in the inquest showed that the psychiatrists treating Deidre were largely
unware of the potential side-effects of Hydroxychloroquine which Deidre was received
for her Systemic Lupus Erythematosus. These include mental changes and psychosis.

The Coroner is concerned that consultants treating other mental patients who are
receiving this drug should be aware of these side-effects, and is concerned that there
should be proper liaison with the consultant dermatologist over its toxic and potential
metal health side-effects.

in General the Coroner is concerned that the psychiatrists treating a patient in a Mental
Health Unit_should have the benefit of specialist advice from outside consultants who

may be treating the patient for a physical condition

British Association of Dermatologists

Hydroxychloroquine

1. The expert evidence received in this inquest = ws S RSER Cae could
build up to toxic levels even with normal dosage f the Dept of Toxicology,
Birmingham Heartlands Hospital reported that there is a clear cross-over between
apparently toxic concentrations and apparently therapeutic concentrations. Dee at the
time of her death had a concentration of approximately 25 mg/L and fatalities at 7.5
mg/L.

The Coroner is concerned that this drug should not be prescribed to a patient suffering
from Lupus (which in itself is not life-threatening) without an awareness that toxic levels
can build up even at the recommended dose.

The Coroner is concerned that the dermatologist prescribing this drug should liaise with
other consultants treating the patient for other conditions (in Deidre’s case for her mentaf
health problems) so that specialist knowledge about the toxic effects of this drug can be
Shared.

CEO Alerts NHS

Hydroxychloroquine

1. The evidence in this inquest is that Deidre (who was a detained patient under Section
3 MHA) was being given a drug for a physical condition (Lupus) which can build up to
toxic levels even at normal doses. The inquest heard that there is no routine checking of
Hydroxychioroquine levels at clinical level, even though said he thought that
clinical monitoring of this drug might be important.

The Coroner is concerned that there may be other dependent persons suffering from
lupus (or other conditions for which Hydroxychloroquine is prescribed in NHS hospitals
in England and Wales) who may also have toxic levels of Hydroxychloroquine in their
system unbeknown to their carers.

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe that you
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 34 October 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 Interested
Persons:

1 (for Deidre Harvey's family)

2. ead of Mental Health Nursing, Cwm Taf University Health Board

3. The Chief Medical Officer for Wales

4. The CEO of NHS England

| 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.

8" August 2017

Cc J Woolley Assistant Coroner, South Wales Central

Responses

5 responses 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 Social Care (PDF)
ae From Jackie Doyle-Price MP

Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Mental Health,
ot cath & R E C Efegt figs ahd Suicide Prevention
; 06 DEC a
Social Care aa 39 Vicions Sree

SW1H 0EU
020 7210 4850

Your Ref: 9930
Our Ref: PFD-1145655

Christopher John Woolley

HM Assistant Coroner, South Wales Central
Coroner's Office

The Old Courthouse

Courthouse Street

Pontypridd CF37 1JW

Thank you for your correspondence of 10 August to the former Health Secretary,
Jeremy Hunt, about the death of Ms Deidre Harvey. I am replying as Minister with
portfolio responsibility for mental health and I am grateful for the additional time in
which to do so.

' December 2018

Your report directs two matters of concern to the Secretary of State for Health which
I will address in turn giving the policy position in England. You will appreciate that
responsibility for the NHS in Wales is a devolved matter.

Firstly, on the management of physical health care within mental health settings, my
officials have made enquiries with NHS England.

Improving the physical healthcare of people with serious mental illness in both
inpatient and community settings is a key priority for NHS England as set out in the
Five Year Forward View for Mental Health'. As part of this programme, NHS
England wants to ensure that individuals cared for on inpatient wards have access to
the same quality of physical healthcare as they would in community settings.

NHS England has committed to leading work to ensure that by 2020/21, 280,000
more people living with serious mental illness have their physical health needs met
by increasing early detection and expanding access to evidence based physical health

care assessment and intervention each year. This is to be delivered across primary
and secondary care settings.

To date, NHS England has overseen significant progress to improve physical
healthcare for people with serious mental illness. Within inpatient and community
mental health providers this has been driven by the national J/mproving physical
healthcare to reduce premature mortality in people with severe mental illness?
CQUIN (commissioning for quality and innovation) and implementation support.

Also highlighted in the Five Year Forward View for Mental Health is the lack of
appropriate data sharing to enable organisations to identify co-morbidities, anticipate
problems and plan care in a holistic fashion. People with poor mental health may
require primary care, secondary physical care and social care, as well as mental
health services, but we acknowledge that the lack of linked datasets hinders effective
provision.

The Summary Care Record (SCR) is an attempt to address this by including key
primary care information about an individual such as medication, allergies and
adverse reactions. However, it does not routinely include care plan information or
allow access to mental health care records (or physical care records) which is a
significant missed opportunity.

The Five Year Forward View for Mental Health acknowledged that more work is
needed to ensure data can be linked across public agencies, to promote integration of
care.

To assist with the safe and secure sharing of data, a number of professionally
endorsed interoperability standards have been defined. This includes being able to
share mental health discharge summaries from acute to other care settings.

NHS England, in conjunction with the Local Government Association, has also
established the Local Health and Care Record? initiative that has commenced with
five exemplar sites covering around 40 per cent of the population. These exemplars
will look to establish a longitudinal record of care for access and contribution by care
professionals and patients. Its use will be demonstrated through a number of priority
care pathways such as Frailty, Delirium, Cancer and Long Term Conditions.

Turning to your second matter of concern, on the removal of ligature points in mental
health settings, it is for mental health providers in England to ensure they have
policies in place to effectively assess and manage environmental risk in line with
available guidance*’.

NHS organisations in England are expected to have ligature risk assessment policies
in place that allow them to assess the risk, mitigate the risk and prioritise removal of
the risk once a ligature point has been identified in any facility. The principles of
ligature point management should consider multiple environmental, clinical and
operational health and safety factors such as height, access, room usage, patient
population risks including infection control, dementia and self-harm, plus staff
resource and the ability to adequately observe patients. This will include ligature
point removal, or adequate controls with a record of the agreed mitigations put in
place.

You will be interested to note that NHS Improvement issued an Estates and Facilities
Alert on 19 September 2018 on the ‘Assessment of ligature points’. The alert has not
been made available in the public domain for patient safety reasons as it was deemed
that it may give ideas to people with intention to self-harm. However, it has been

placed on the central alert system operated by the Medicines and Healthcare products

Regulatory Agency (MHRA) (https://www.cas.mhra.gov.uk/Home.aspx) and so is
available to providers of services, including in Wales.

Finally, I am aware that the MHRA and NHS Improvement are responding separately
to your matter of concern on the monitoring of patients who are prescribed
Hydroxychloroquine. I hope that response is helpful.

Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention.

E DOYLE-PRICE

* https:// www.gov.uk/government/publications/environmental-design-guide-adult-medium-secure-services
Response from Mhra (PDF)
ae

Medicines & Healthcare products
Regulatory Agency

Christopher John Woolley

Medicines and Healthcare products

Assistant Coroner, Regulatory Agency
South Wales Central 10 South Colonnade
The Old Courthouse can Wharf

oncen
Courthouse Street £14 4PU
Pontypridd United Kingdom
CF37 14W +44 (0) 20 3080 6000
28 November 2018 gov.ukimhra

RECEIVE!
03 DEC 208

Dear Mr Woolley
Reference: 9930

Thank you for sending us the Regulation 28/29 Prevent Future Death report concerning the death of Mrs Deidre
Harvey. Further to your agreement to extend the deadline for response to the 3% December 2018, we have assessed’
the data in relation to the question you raised for the MHRA:

1. The evidence in this inquest is that Deidre (who was a detained patient under Section 3 MHA) was being given
a drug for a physical condition (Lupus) which can build up to toxic levels even at normal doses. The inquest heard
that there is no routine checking of Hydroxychloroquine levels at clinical level, even though said he
thought that clinical monitoring of this drug might be important.

We have further considered your concerns that there may be other dependent persons suffering from lupus (or other
conditions for which hydroxychloroquine is prescribed in NHS hospitals in England and Wales) who may also have
toxic levels of hydroxychloroquine in their system unbeknown to their carers.

Some symptoms of hydroxychloroquine toxicity can be observed commonly at therapeutic doses as described in
section 4.8 of the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) for this drug. Other adverse reactions occur at a lower
frequency. Monitoring of toxicity is mainly recommended by way of ophthalmological examinations before treatment
initiation and at least every 12 months thereafter. Monitoring of blood levels is currently only recommended in patients
with severely compromised renal or hepatic function. However, caution should be applied when using
hydroxychloroquine in patients with hepatic or renal disease, and in those taking drugs known to affect those organs.

On 21% November 2018, we sought the advice of the Commission on Human Medicines’ Pharmacovigilance Expert
Advisory Group (PEAG) on the available data including the information outlined in the report of Mrs Harvey's death.
The PEAG advised that in order to ensure that any actions are evidence based, further details on the report would
be helpful.

We would therefore be very grateful if you could provide us with further information on the following points, if available:

1. The blood concentration observed in the patient is not clear as in section 4 (page 1) >15 mg/dL. and in section
5 (page 4) 25mg/L is stated. Would you be able to confirm the observed concentration?

5.
6,

Assuming a blood concentration of 15-25mg/L the patient would have been expected to present with severe
hydroxychloroquine toxicity such as headache, visual disturbances, cardiovascular collapse, convulsions,
and hypokalaemia. Could you please confirm if any symptoms of overdose were observed in Mrs Harvey?
It is stated in the report that Mrs Harvey ‘... suffered from several concomitant physical conditions...’ and
indicated that she received mood stabilisers and anti-depressants. However, only lamotrigine is specified as
a concomitant drug. Would you be able to confirm if tamotrigine was indeed the only concomitant medication?
If not, could you provide us with details of any other concomitant drugs Mrs Harvey received as there is a
possibility of drug interactions with hydroxychloroquine which may have contributed to the high observed
blood levels. In addition, concomitant drugs may explain the patient's hyponatraemia.

Hydroxychloroquine is widely distributed in the body and following death redistribution into the circulatory
system occurs. It is therefore possible that the observed blood concentration does not reflect the drug level
at the time point when Mrs Harvey was still alive. Would you be able to confirm that the observed
concentration derived from a post-mortem blood sample? And if so, could you provide information on the
time elapsed following her death until the sample was taken?

Is there any information on a renal and/ or liver function test for Mrs Harvey?

Would you be able to confirm that the patient was compliant in taking her medication?

Thank you for your help with these questions, which will enable us to reach a position on whether regulatory action

is required. | look forward to hearing from you.

Yours Sincerely,

~ Veo kha

ee

Dr lan Hudson
Chief Executive
Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
Response from NHS Improvement (PDF)
NHS

Improvement

Patient Safety

NHS Improvement
Wellington House
133-155 Waterloo Road
London SE1 8UG

https://www.improvement.nhs.uk

26/11/2018
Dear Mr Woolley,

Re: Regulation 28 Coroner's Report HARVEY

Thank you for your Regulation 28 letter of 25th September 2018, following the
inquest into the death of Deidre Harvey. | was sorry to hear of her death in such sad
circumstances and wish to extend my condolences to her family.

In order to avoid confusion given multiple persons addressed, | will be responding
only to the issue directed at me. However please note that NHS Improvement works
closely with our counterparts in Wales to share information to improve the safety of
patients and quality of care, including in the area of management of ligature points,
and my patient safety team has also supported other persons and bodies addressed
in your letter in their responses to you.

You have raised the issue that there may be other patients with conditions requiring
Hydroxychloroquine, who may be at risk of toxic levels of this drug in their system,
and that new guidance for healthcare professionals may be required in relation to
monitoring of this medication. You directed this concern jointly to me and the CEO of
the Medicine and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), who we have
worked closely with on this issue. You kindly granted us an extension of our reply
until 3° December 2018 to allow more time to explore this issue.

collaboration trust respect innovation courage compassion
a

The issue of monitoring for toxicity that you raised is primarily in the remit of the
MHRA, and they will provide the substantive reply to you on this issue. We have
supported their work through undertaking a search of the National Reporting and
Learning System. This did not identify any additional cases where systematic toxicity
from Hydroxychloroquine had been identified, but did reinforce the importance of
annual eye screening for patients on long-term Hydroxychloroquine, as set out in
current guidance from the British Society for Rneumatology and British health
Professionals in Rheumatology ‘Guideline for the prescription and monitoring of non-
biologic disease-modifying anti rheumatic drugs (see

https://cks.nice.org.uk/dmards#!scenario:8)

We stand ready to support the MHRA in ensuring any future changes to monitoring
reach all appropriate healthcare professionals and patients, including through our
shared national network of Medication Safety Officers.

Thank you for giving us this opportunity to work with our partners to identify any
action needed to prevent future deaths.

Yours sincerely,

Piatfaslo-

National Director of Patient Safety

NHS Improvement

collaboration trust respect innovation courage compassion
a
Response from University Health Board (PDF)
Your Ref/eich cyf: 
Our Ref/ein cyf: 
Date/dyddiad: 
Tel/ff6n: 
Fax/FFacs: 
Email/ebost: 
Dept/ad ran: 

17/2384/INQ 
16° October 2018 
01443 744800 
01443 744889 

Patient Care & Safety 

r9\ GIG 
eff}gs 7i® 
vP?" K}HS 
\'% 

Bwrdd lechyd Prifysgol 
Cwm Taf 
University Health Board 

Private & Confidential 
Mr CJ Woolley 
Assitant Coroner South Wales Region 
Pontypridd Coroners Court 
Court House Street 
Pontypridd 
CF37 lJW 

Dear Mr Woolley 

RE: Regulation 28 - Deidire Harvey 

Thank you for the correspondence in relation to the above Regulation 28 received on 16 August 
2018, which details the areas of concern following the conclusion of the inquest held between 16  
27 July 2018. 

Please be assured that the Health Board has taken this matter extremely seriously,  has learnt lessons 
following investigation and the matters raised at the inquest into the circumstances. Comprehensive 
and robust action has been taken to minimise the risk of any recurrence. 

1.  Action taken to plan and monitor improvements 

A corrective Action Plan for Improvement was developed following Mrs Harvey's death. 
This has been updated to reflect the concerns identified within the Regulation 28 Report. 

2.  Actions Implemented 

A number of actions have been taken forward by the Mental Health Directorate, the progress 
with these actions is reflected in the attached action plan which include: 

A safe system of work has been implemented to ensure that staff are recording items stored 
in and taken from patient PODS. 

Dissemination of risk management policies to frontline staff are now shared by team leaders 
through ward meetings and staff sign off individually to demonstrate sharing. 

A standard list of documents for disclosure at inquest is being developed. 

Return Address: Cwm Taf University Health Board, Headquarters, Navigation Park, Abercynon, CF45 
4SN 

Chair/ Cadeirydd; Professor Marcus Longley 

Chief Executive/ Prif Weithredydd: Mrs A Williams 

Cwm Taf University Health Board is the operational name of the Cwm Taf University Health Board/Bwrdd lechyd Prifysgol Cwm Taf yw enw gweithredol 
Bwrdd lechyd Prifysgol  Cwm Taf 

 
 I sincerely hope that this information and enclosed Action Plan will reassure you that the Health 
Board has learnt important lessons from the investigation into the care provided to Mrs Harvey 
and that effective action has now been taken to prevent further deaths. 

I would like to convey once again my deepest sympathy and sincere apologies to Mrs Harvey's 

family for the failings identified. 

Yours sincerely 

.see 

Chief Executive Officer 

, Director of Primary/Community Mental Health 
, Assistant Directorate of Operation Mental Health 

 Head of Nursing, Mental Health 

Return Address: Cwm Taf University Health Board, Headquarters, Navigation Park, Abercynon, CF45 
45N 

Chair/ Cadeirydd; Professor Marcus Longley 

Chief Executive/ Prif Weithredydd:  Mrs A Williams 

Cwm Taf University Health Board is the operational name of the Cwm Taf University Health Board/Bwrdd lechyd Prifysgol Cwm Taf yw enw gweithredol 
Bwrdd lechyd Prifysgo!  Cwm Taf
Response from Welsh Government (PDF)
Professor Chris Jones
Dirprwy Brif Swyddog Meddygol
Deputy Chief Medical Officer

Wie

Llywodraeth Cymru
Welsh Government

Mr C J Woolley
Assistant Coroner
South Wales Ceniral Area

October 2018

Dear Mr Woolley

Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths — Deidre Harvey

Thank you for your letter of 10 August 2018, enclosing the above Regulation 28 report following
your investigation into the death of Deidre Harvey. | am responding on behalf Vaughan Gething
Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Services in Wales.

We know the interaction between mental and physical health has important consequences at all
levels of a patient's care and treatment. 46% of people with severe mental illness also have
significant long term physical conditions. Admission to a mental health inpatient facility should
be seen as an opportunity to improve a person’s mental and physical health. It is also an
opportunity to review the medications that a person takes, particularly in terms of their side
effects and interactions with other medications.

It is encouraging to see several of the Royal Colleges and other educational bodies are already
undertaking work to explore the addition to the new components of the professional educational
curricula, in order to achieve the person-centred approach which combines the various aspects
of a person’s physical and mental health conditions in a holistic fashion. We expect any outside
consultants to work collaboratively with the team involved with a patient's day to day care to
ensure any decisions taken concerning a patient's treatment plan are based on their holistic
health needs.

NHS organisations are expected to ensure that units / wards are safe for the patents being
cared within them. Fixtures and fittings should therefore be assessed to ensure they are anti-
ligature. Where ligature risk points are identified but cannot be immediately addressed, it is the
responsibility of the professionals caring for people on such a unit and the health board
generally to put robust measures in place to mitigate the risks.

In the shorter term, Welsh Government officials will be taking this tragic incident for discussion
at the all Wales Serious Incidents Group in October. Led by the NHS Delivery Unit, it will
contribute to improve learning and the development and dissemination of further guidance to be
shared across the differing professional groups.

C) Ffon/Tel: 03000258899

enc rent Parc Cathays, Caerdydd CF10 3NQ Cathays Park, Cardiff CF10 3NQ
wane Ebost/Email: PSChiefMedicalOfficer@wales.gsi.gov.uk

| do assure you that Welsh Government will keep this case and the learning that arises under
ongoing review.

Yours sincerely,
Cwiar'do

PROFESSOR CHRIS JONES

Related reports

Other reports by Christopher Woolley

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.