Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2019

Kenneth Whittington

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2019-0049, written 14 Feb 2019. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report14 Feb 2019
Reference2019-0049
DeceasedKenneth Whittington
CoronerVeronica Hamilton-Deeley
Coroner areaBrighton and Hove
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Organisation namedBrighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS 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.

VERONICA HAMILTON-DEELEY DL, THE CORONER’S OFFICE

LL.B. WOODVALE, LEWES ROAD
Her Majesty’s Senior Coroner : BRIGHTON
for the City of Brighton & Hove BN2 3QB
Assistant Coroners Telephone: Brighton (01273) 292046
CATHARINE PALMER LL.B (HONS) Fax: Brighton (01273) 292047

GILVA D.J.TISSHAW, BA(LAW)HONS

CORONERS SOCIETY OF ENGLAND AND WALES
ANNEX A
REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)

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

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1. Dame Marianne Griffiths, Chief Executive, Brighton and Sussex

University Hospitals NHS Trust, Royal Sussex County Hospital,

ighton

Consultant General & Colorectal Surgeon, Brighton

and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Royal Sussex County

Hospital, Eastern Road, Brighton

Deputy Medical Director and Safety and Quality

onsuitant in Intensive Care and Anaesthetics, Brighton and Sussex
Universit pitals NHS Trust, Royal Sussex County Hospital

4, meal... of Medico-legal Services, Brighton and Sussex

niversity Hospitals NHS Trust, Royal Sussex County Hospital, Eastern
Road, Brighton

2.

3.

CORONER

| am Veronica HAMILTON-DEELEY, Senior Coroner, for the City of Brighton and
Hove .

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

On 14" June 2018 | commenced an investigation into the death of Kenneth
George Alfred WHITTINGTON. The investigation concluded at the end of the
inquest on 6" February 2019.The conclusion of the inquest was NARRATIVE
CONCLUSION — PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SHEET.

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH
See Record of Inquest

VERONICA HAMILTON-DEELEY DL, THE CORONER’S OFFICE

LL.B. WOODVALE, LEWES ROAD
Her Majesty’s Senior Coroner : BRIGHTON
for the City of Brighton & Hove : BN2 3QB
Assistant Coroners Telephone: Brighton (01273) 292046
CATHARINE PALMER LL.B (HONS) Fax: Brighton (01273) 292047

GILVA D.J.TISSHAW, BA(LAW)HONS

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) Mr. Whittington’s initial operation was abandoned because on his pre operation
assessment on the 23 March 2018 there was no Junior Doctor present.
It became apparent that the presence of a Junior Doctor was not imperative by
any means.
| gather that since this situation occurred and caused a delay in Mr.
Whittington’s operation the presence of a Junior Doctor in these circumstances
is really no longer required. Although the delay neither caused nor contributed
to Mr. Whittington’s death it must nonetheless have caused him considerable
anxiety and inconvenience. .

(2) Most importantly post operation ‘paperwork’ contained no instructions regarding

the management of his urinary catheter or how long it was to remain in situ.
a <2: that he had expected to be in place for at least two weeks post

operatively and very likely longer because at the operation he had had to make
a bladder repair and therefore did not want to remove the urinary catheter until
such time as the bladder had healed.
Had he made this requirement clear | have no doubt that this matter would not
have come to Inquest.

(3) Immediately post operatively Mr. Whittington’s epidural became disconnected.
He complained of increasing pain over the ensuing night and in spite of this
nobody, not even the most senior Nurses, ever checked his epidural!.

It was not until some hours later in the early morning that the cause for his
increasing pain was ascertained.

At that stage his pain control was optimised however, this is not a situation
which should have occurred. During his period of increased pain he developed
a pneumonia.

(4) Following the operation Mr. Whittington’s last contact with his Consultant was
immediately post operatively.
Due to the system operated at the Royal Sussex County Hospital (along with
many other hospitals as | understand it) the situation is that the operative
surgeon will not see the patient again unless there is some specific reason to do
so. ‘
Instead the patient will be seen by the on call surgical team for that particular
__|____day or part of the day.

VERONICA HAMILTON-DEELEY DL, THE CORONER’S OFFICE

LL.B. . WOODVALE, LEWES ROAD
Her Majesty’s Senior Coroner BRIGHTON
for the City of Brighton & Hove BN2 3QB
Assistant Coroners Telephone: Brighton (01273) 292046
CATHARINE PALMER LL.B (HONS) Fax: Brighton (01273) 292047

GILVA D,J.TISSHA W, BA(LAW)HONS

Mr. Whittington therefore saw a Consultant who did not know him and who did
not understand either the condition that Mr. Whittington had come in to hospital
with (Colovesical Fistula) or the fact that he needed an operation which had
included a bladder repair as | have already pointed out (2 above).

The surgeon wanted the urinary catheter to remain in situ for at least two weeks
to allow the bladder repair that had been made at Mr. Whittington’s operation to
heal. .

This was absolutely crucial and yet no specific instructions were given and the
post-operative pathway which was being followed gave very little help in that
respect either, save to suggest that the catheter should always be removed
early, well prior to discharge.

Had there been. post-operative instructions and had there been a checklist for
the Consultant picking up the ward rounds following the operation, the catheter
would not have been removed and Mr. Whittington would not have died.

If the Trust is insistent on perpetuating this lack of continuity between the
Surgeon and the post-operative Consultant care there must be sufficient
handover and sufficient clear instructions from the Surgeon doing the operation
as to the post-operative care so as to protect the patient.

(5) On the 2" May Mr Whittington’s haemoglobin was low. Mr. Whittington needed
and was written up to receive two units of blood on the 2" May. In fact he
received one unit on the 3% May.

There is absolutely no rationale for what happened or exploration thereof. This
is unsatisfactory ~

(6) Mr. Whittington was due to be discharged on the 4" May. His discharge
documentation which acts as a handover for his Doctors was barely completed
and this lack of completion is unacceptable.

6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe you
AND your organisation 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 by 7 May 2019. |, the coroner may extend the period.

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting

3

VERONICA HAMILTON-DEELEY DL, THE CORONER’S OFFICE

LLB, WOODVALE, LEWES ROAD
Her Majesty’s Senior Coroner BRIGHTON
for the City of Brighton & Hove BN2 3QB
Assistant Coroners Telephone: Brighton (01273) 292046
CATHARINE PALMER LL.B (HONS) ° Fax: Brighton (01273) 292047

GILVA D.J].TISSHAW, BA(LAW)HONS ~

r

out the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed.

—t

8 COPIES and PUBLICATION

| have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested
Persons

ena

4. Secretary of State for Health, Department of Health
5. Simon Stevens, Chief Executive, NHS England
6. Clinical Commissioning Group

| 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.

9 Date: 14" February 2019 SIGNED BY:

Vsfanc fencing.

Senior Coroner Brighton and Hove

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 Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust (PDF)
INAS:

Brighton and Sussex
University Hospitals

NHS Trust
Your ref. VHD/ST/MWhittington
Our Ref: RS/INQ/18/68
3 May 2019
Miss Veronica Hamilton-Deeley Brighton & Sussex University Hospitais
HM Senior Coroner for Brighton & Hove NHS Trust
The Coroner's Office Trust Headquarters
Woodvale Royal Sussex County Hospital
Lewes Road Eastern Road
Brighton Brighton
BN2 3QB : BN2 5BE

Dear Miss Hamilton-Deeley

The Late Kenneth Whittington

Thank you for your letter of 14 February 2019 enclosing your Regulation 28 report, Record
of Inquest, and for sharing your concerns. We have acted on your concerns, have learnt
from Mr Whittington’s inquest, and | am pleased to say we have made improvements to our
services which | will summarise below.

Firstly | wish to offer my heartfelt condolences to Mr Whittington’s family and friends.

The findings from the inquest have been shared widely within the Trust and have been
discussed at the Safety Huddle attended by the Medical Director and Nursing Director, the
Serious Incident Review Group meeting and the Division of Surgery’s governance meetings.
This has ensured senior ownership to review the systems and processes in place, make the
necessary changes, and ensure the learning is filtered through to all levels of staffing within
the Trust. ,

The i itera ing the learning and improvements following the inquest have been
led b Chief of Service for the Division of |
Consultant Governance Lead for Surgery, and iE Directorate Lead Nurse

has been in contact with Mr Whittington’s family as part of the process and will
continue to provide them with support and information.

There was no junior doctor present at the pre operative assessment appointment to see Mr
Whittington. This resulted in his atypical antibodies not being identified and therefore the
surgery did not take place on the original date planned. For this | apologise. A General
Medical Council (GMC) and Health Education England Kent Surrey and Sussex (HEEKSS)
Deanery review of the Digestive Diseases Directorate in the Trust was undertaken. This
review was critical of our use of junior doctors in pre-operative assessment processes and
they recommended that these tasks should be nurse delivered as is the case in most NHS
Trusts now. A Working Group was convened to change the pre operative assessment
process and a new model is being developed. Nursing Staff are responsible for flagging pre
operative abnormal blood test results. Mr Threlfall is in contact with the Pre Operative

INAS:

Brighton and Sussex
University Hospitals
NHS Trust
Assessment Manager and the Perioperative Directorate Lead Nurse and this work is on-
going to maximise efficiency and safety.

The documentation in Mr Whittington’s records was not to the level we would expect. As a
result, [MB has fed on a piece of work to ensure the general surgeons will use an
electronic system (Bluespier) for recording operations. The sections of the operation note
mandated by the Royal College of Surgeons can be easily filled in on the computer to
generate a typed operation note in clear, legible print. A section for post-operative
instructions is included on Bluespier. This means the operation note and post operative
instructions are recorded electronically making it easier for all staff to access and read. This
can be printed and added to the paper records.

In addition, the Division of Surgery have reviewed the Enhanced Recovery Programme
booklet and have amended this to include a section on the management of post operative

‘urinary catheters. An order for the amended booklets has been placed with the printers.
When the new booklets have been printed we will roll these out for use.

To strengthen awareness and recording, the daily ward round sheets now include a pre
printed prompt on urinary catheters. An audit is underway of documentation in surgery
measured against National Guidelines| is leading on this audit.

Our practice has changed and Nursing staff no longer remove urinary catheters on the
Surgical wards, without clear documented instruction in the records from the doctors to do
so.

The Senior Nurses are also conducting an audit to focus on the quality of the Level 9A
nursing documentation, these results will be shared with the Clinical Governance meeting in
the Division of Surgery for action as necessary dependent on the results.

Wendy Caddye, Nurse Consultant for Pain Management, has reviewed and revised the
Trust’s Epidural Policy to provide robust and clear guidance for all staff on the management
of disconnected and failed epidurals. A section has been added to the policy titled epidural
failure. To supplement this, all Level 9A nurses have attended, or are in the process of
booking to attend, an Acute Pain Study Day which includes specific training on epidural
management. All nurses in charge of a shift on the ward are fully epidural trained.

We do operate a system of a consultant surgeon being the consultant for the week, this
allows us to ensure our patients are seen by a consultant each day. To improve continuity of
care and ensure the team are aware of each patient on the ward, on 25 February 2019 we
introduced mandatory Board Rounds to take place in the morning, before the ward rounds,
on all wards and in all specialities to facilitate improved communication between ward teams
(doctors, nurses and allied health professionals). The principles of the Board Round are to
confirm the patient acuity (how unwell they are), have they had any test results which require
review, do they need any tests to progress their care, what interventions/actions need to be
taken and when e.g. removal of catheter. The meeting occurs every morning. Actions are
recorded on an Electronic Whiteboard and are followed up by the Nurse in Charge that day.
Feedback from staff about the daily Board Rounds indicates that this has facilitated
improved communication between all healthcare professionals at all levels on Level 9A. The
surgical team also have a 4pm review meeting each day. The purpose of the meeting is to
review and complete any outstanding actions and prepare a clear and thorough handover for
the surgical team covering the night shift. The rationale for any changes in the plan will then
be documented in the patient's records. | agree, the documentation in Mr Whittington’s case

NHS:

Brighton and Sussex
University Hospitals
. ° NHS Trust
in this regard was not good enough. The importance of good clear record keeping has been
reinforced at the Ward Huddles and at the Clinical Governance meeting. We continually
strive to improve the quality of our documentation and the audit results will drive this
improvement on an on-going basis.

Discharge documentation was poor in Mr Whittington’s records; we have now appointed a
discharge facilitator to work with the Level 9A staff and to assist with patient discharges and
in turn with the documentation of discharge planning. We have also revised the two band 7
nurse roles on the ward so one of these nurses in their role will focus on discharges (and
admissions) and make sure the discharge planning is on track and the accompanying
discharge paperwork is complete. The discharge planner template is being revised to make
it clearer and easier to use and record the key information. The documentation audits will
review the quality of discharge documentation.

Where any individual nurse’s documentation is found not to be the level and quality
expected, the Ward Manager and Matron will address this with the individual nurse.

The above is a summary of the actions we have taken following the inquest and your
Regulation 28 Report, | hope you feel assured by the improvements we have made to our
systems and processes. | am confident these improvements have increased the safety of
our patients and staff.

Finally, | would just like to reiterate my condolences to Mr Whittington’s family and friends on
behalf of the Trust.

Yours sincerely

Dr George Findlay
Chief Medical Officer and Deputy Chief Executive

Related reports

Other reports by Veronica Hamilton-Deeley

See all →

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

See all →

Track Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals 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.