Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2019
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2019-0325, written 30 Sep 2019. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 30 Sep 2019 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2019-0325 |
| Deceased | Julie Barrow |
| Coroner | Alison Mutch |
| Coroner area | Manchester South |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Organisation named | Stockport NHS Foundation Trust |
| 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.
REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: Secretary of State for Health CORONER ! am Alison Mutch, Senior Coroner, for the Coroner Area of Greater Manchester South 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 37 April 2019 | commenced an investigation into the death of Julie Ann Barrow. The investigation concluded on the 12" September 2019 and the conclusion was one of Accidental Death. The medical cause of death was 1a) Traumatic Brain Injury CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Julie Ann Barrow had significant learning disabilities. She was to undergo an elective examination at the Manchester Royal Infirmary on 24 August 2018. On the 17 August 2018 she attended Stepping Hill Hospital with perianal pain and rectal bleeding. She was admitted. No reasonable adjustment care plan was completed. She was reviewed over the next few days with a plan to transfer to the Manchester Royal Infirmary for the elective procedure on 24" August 2018. On 23"¢ August 2018 the Manchester Royal Infirmary said she should stay at Stepping Hill Hospital for treatment. She was distressed by the decision. A CT scan at Stepping Hill Hospital on 28" August 2018 was followed by a discharge. On 8" September 2018 she was readmitted with suspected painful haemorrhoids. A planned examination on 11 September 2018 was cancelled after she had waited all day on nil by mouth. On 12 September 2018 it went ahead and identified haemorrhoids. No surgical intervention was deemed to be required. No best interests meeting took place. On 9th November 2018 she presented with further pain but was too distressed for a full examination to take place. On 12" November 2018 she was diagnosed with adjustment disorder in the context of the recent traumatic events around her bleeding, the investigations and the surgical procedures she had undergone. She was given diazepam and chlorpromazine to manage her anxiety and distress. These had a significant sedative effect on her. On 18 April 2019 she fell on the stairs at the family home. She was admitted to Stepping Hill Hospital and then Salford Royal Hospital. An un- survivable brain injury was diagnosed. She died at Salford Royal Hospital on 2 April 2019. 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 inquest heard that despite two in-patient stays, there was no best interests meeting held to discuss her care; 2. On each of her admissions her parents took her needs passport in with her. The inquest was told that this should be used to develop the reasonable adjustments care plan and be accessible to all staff caring for her. On her first admission there was no reasonable care plan put in place despite the fact that she had clear and significant disabilities that would have benefited from an effective plan and her passport was available. Her passport location was not known by all staff caring for her; 3. Julie Ann Barrow was cared for devotedly in hospital by her parents who are in their 80s. Their evidence to the inquest was that Julie was never effectively communicated with by clinicians treating her and her needs not understood. So far as her needs were concerned she was | “invisible” to staff. An approach that recognised just how traumatic a hospital stay and medical treatment was for her would have significantly reduced the trauma that led to her developing adjustment disorder. The consultant psychiatrist who gave evidence to the inquest was very clear that the pain and trauma of the hospital stays had caused the acute adjustment disorder; 4. Her parents stayed with her 24/7 to try and support her and reduce the trauma. Despite their age; their importance to her and the need for them to stay with her, staff at the trust expected them to sleep overnight on standard hospital bedside chairs. It was only when a complaint was escalated that attempts were made to find them alternatives to the chair: 5. The inquest was told by the safeguarding team that cuts by the Local Authority that had resulted in the loss of the learning disability liaison role, had reduced the ability of the safeguarding team to support people with learning disabilities within the hospital. 6 | ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe 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 25"" November 2079. |, 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 namely Miss Barrow’'s parents, 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. Alison Mutch OBE HM Senior Coroner 30.09.2019 (
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.
MG From Caroline Dinenage MP’ D e p artm ent Minister of State for Care of Health & 39 Victoria Street . don Social Care SWIHOEU 020 7210 4850 97 FEB 2020 HM CORONER MANCHESTER SOUTH Your Reference: 12641/MG Our Reference: PFD-1192586 Ms Alison Patricia Mutch HM Senior Coroner, Manchester South HM Coroner's Court 1 Mount Tabor Street Stockport SK1 3AG Ss February 2020 Thank you for your correspondence of 30 September 2019 to Matt Hancock about the death of Julie Ann Barrow. | am replying as Minister with responsibility for learning disabilities and | am grateful for the additional time in which to do so. | would like to say how saddened | was to read of Julie Barrow's death and the tragic circumstances surrounding it. This must be a distressing time for her family and | offer my most sincere condolences to them. The loss of a child is deeply distressing and | can only imagine how painful it must be when there are concerns about the care provided. Your report highlights concern around healthcare professionals not having an adequate understanding of Julie Barrow’s needs or recognising the importance of making reasonable adjustments to support her during her stay in hospital. | would like to provide reassurance that we are taking steps to address such concerns to improve the quality of care delivered to people with learning disabilities. In June 2018, NHS Improvement published Learning Disability Improvement Standards for NHS trusts in England’. The Standards are intended to help NHS trusts measure the quality of service they provide to people with learning disabilities, autism or both. The four Standards concem respecting and protecting rights; inclusion and engagement; workforce; and, specialist learning disability services. In terms of respecting and protecting rights, NHS trusts must demonstrate that they have made reasonable adjustments to care pathways, have mechanisms in place to identify and flag patients who may require reasonable adjustments, and measures to promote anti- discriminatory practice in relation to people with learning disabilities, autism or both. The Standards also require staff to be trained and then routinely updated in how to deliver care to people with learning disabilities, autism or both, in a way that takes account of their ~ rights, needs and health vulnerabilities. Guidance on implementing the Standards suggests that this should include ensuring staff have been trained in learning disability and autism awareness; health issues associated with learning disabilities and autism; supporting people with challenging needs; safeguarding; human rights and mental capacity and best interest’s assessments. Compliance with the Learning Disability Improvement Standards is part of the NHS Standard Contract for 2019/20, which is mandated by NHS England for use by commissioners for all healthcare services other than primary care. While the Learning Disability Improvement Standards currently only apply to NHS Trusts, the NHS Long-Term Plan outlines that this would apply to all NHS-funded care by 2023/242. Adherence to the Learning Disability Improvement Standards will help NHS organisations meet the recommendations from the Learning Disabilities Mortality Review (LeDeR) Programme. The LeDeR Programme was established in 2015 to support local areas to review the deaths of people with learning disabilities, identify learning from those deaths, and take forward the learning into service improvement initiatives. | am advised that a Learning Disabilities Mortality Review of the care that Julie Barrow received has been completed and that the review concluded that the care provided fell short of good practice. Leamings have been identified and | am clear that Stockport NHS Foundation Trust must take the required action to improve services for people with learning disabilities. The most common learning points and recommendations arising from local LeDeR reviews relate to the need for inter-agency collaboration and communication, as well as greater awareness of the needs of people with learning disabilities. The Government's response to the second LeDeR report, published in September 2018°, outlined a series of actions, as well as work already underway, to address these issues and the health inequalities that people with learning disabilities experience. The key theme throughout our response is that of facilitating better care of people with learning disabilities by sharing information on their needs, and making reasonable adjustments to improve access, and the responsiveness of services to meet those needs. The Government's response to the second LeDeR report highlighted a number of initiatives already in place or under development to strengthen information sharing. These include the piloting, by NHS Digital, of a reasonable adjustment flag on patient records to indicate the support needs and reasonable adjustments that an individual may require. The flag supports improved communication between patients, their carers’ and clinicians, leading to more personalised and safer care and better outcomes. In the trial, staff access information through the patient's record on the Summary Care Record, which is designed 2 https:/Awww.longtermplan.nhs.uk/ * https://assets publishing. service.qov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/739560/govemment- response-to-leder-programme-2nd-annual-report.pdf to share key information about patients. In the longer term, the flag will be integrated ‘ within local clinical systems. The NHS Long-Term Plan commits to a digital flag in the patient record by 2023/24, to ensure that staff know whether a patient has a learning disability or autism. Local LeDeR reviews have also demonstrated that health and social care staff do not always have the skills and knowledge to provide effective, compassionate and safe care to people with learning disabilities. For this reason, we have consulted on the introduction of mandatory learning disability and autism training for health and care staff. In the Governments response to the consultation’, published on 5 November 2019, we set out a series of proposals that will ensure that health and social care staff will, over time, receive training consistent with the Core Capability Frameworks for People with a Learning Disability and Supporting Autistic People’, These Frameworks set out the core skills and knowledge that staff supporting people with a learning disability or autism should have, depending on the nature and intensity of care or support they give. This will ensure that staff have the skills and knowledge that are appropriate to their role. In this regard, we will work with professional bodies and the Devolved Administrations to align pre-registration training as closely as possible with the two Core Capability Frameworks and work towards a common curriculum for pre- registration training in due course. Health Education England is developing an e-learning disability awareness training package for Tier 1 of the Core Capabilities Framework for Supporting People with a Learning Disability. This was a commitment made by the Government in its response to the second LeDeR report. This online tool is scheduled to be completed by the end of March 2020 and will be available on the Mind-Ed Platform — a free educational resource. For Tier 2 training we will develop and test a learning disability and autism training package through 2020/21 in a number of geographical and service settings. We will undertake an evaluation of the training package to inform the final design of training and wider roll out. To mandate the training, we will amend the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014§, to require NHS and social care providers carrying out regulated activities to ensure that their staff have relevant levels of training in learning disability and autism. Other levers will be used to mandate training for staff working in non-regulated activities. Finally, turing to your concern about cuts to Local Authority funding and the loss of the disability liaison officer, | can advise that due to a range of Government actions, Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council will receive an additional £21.1million for adult social care in 4 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/844356/autism-and- leaming-disability-training-for-staff-consultation-response.pdf 5 httos://www.skillsforhealth.org.uk/services/item/945-capabilities-frameworks § https:/Awww.legislation.qov.uk/ukdsi/2014/9780111117613/contents 2019/20, including £1.3million allocated from the £240million Winter Funding announced at the 2018 Budget. : With fuli take-up of the social care precept’ in 2019/20, based on their previous decisions, Stockport Council could receive a total of £52.8million additional funding between 2017/18 and 2019/208. It is for local authorities to determine how this funding is used to support adult social care services. | hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing these concerns to my attention. FROLINE DINENAGE 7 The Government has allowed local authorities that provide adult social care services to increase their council tax by up to 2% for local adult social care. ® Nominal terms.
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Stockport 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.