Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2020

Sean Owen

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2020-0215, written 23 Oct 2020. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report23 Oct 2020
Reference2020-0215
DeceasedSean Owen
CoronerCatherine McKenna
Coroner areaManchester North
CategoryMental heath related deaths · Other related deaths
Organisation namedPennine Care NHS Foundation Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1.  Chief Executive of Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust 

1 

i  CORONER

I am  Catherine McKenna, Area Coroner for the Coroner area of Manchester North 

2 

CORONER'S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this  report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroner's and Justice Act 2009 and Regulations 28 
and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On the 16 June 2019,  I commenced an investigation into the death of Sean Robert Steven Owen (dob: 
23  07  1965).  The  investigation  concluded  at  the  end  of the  inquest  on  23  October 2020.  The 
inquest  determined  that  the  medical  cause  of death  was  1a)  pneumonia  2)  hypoxic  ischaemic 
I returned  the 
encephalopathy secondary to  cardiac arrest secondary to  penetrating  neck injury. 
following  Narrative Conclusion: 

Against a background of paranoid schizophrenia,  the  Deceased died by means of a self-inflicted penetrating 
injury to his neck using a serrated knife at a time when  he was experiencing  psychotic symptoms.  He was 
under the care of the Community Mental Health Team  at the time of his death and it was recognised that he 
posed  a  significant  risk  to  himself  when  non-compliant  with  medication.  The  arrangements  in  place  for 
monitoring  his  medication  compliance  and  managing  the  risks  posed  when  he  became  unwell  were 
inadequate.  Whilst  the  evidence  does  not  show  to  the  required  standard  that  those  failures  caused  or 
contributed  to  his  death,  it  is  possible  that  his  death  would  have  been  averted  had  more  robust  care 
arrangements been in place. 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH 

The  Deceased  had  a  long-standing  history  of  paranoid  schizophrenia  which  was  treatment 
resistant.  From  2014,  he  had  been  maintained  in  the  community  through  depot  medication. 
In 
October 2018,  he refused  to accept the depot injection  and  was  switched  to oral  medication.  He 
became non-compliant with his medication and following an overdose was admitted to Hollingworth 
Ward at Birch Hill Hospital under section 2 of the Mental Health Act 1983 on 6 December 2018. 

The  section  2  was  rescinded  on  31  December  2018  and  during  January  2019  there  were  two 
episodes when the Deceased took overdoses and evidence that he continued to express thoughts 
of wanting to end his own life.  He was discharged from Hollingworth ward on 6 February 2019.  He 
was recognised as a significant risk to himself if he became non-compliant with medication. 

The discharge package set up to monitor his compliance with  medication  had  broken down  by 21 
February  2019  and  after that  date,  his  compliance  was  not monitored.  The  Deceased  was  not 
seen in Outpatient clinic and cancelled  the appointments arranged for him on 28 February, 8 April 
and  2  May 2019.  The monthly  contact with  his  care  co-ordinator was  insufficient  in  view  of the 
risks of his non-compliance. 

On  30  May  2019,  the  Deceased's  sister  alerted  the  care  coordinator  to  the  Deceased's 
deteriorating mental state and the Deceased  agreed  to meet with a psychiatrist.  A  request for an 
appointment to  take  place  within  3  to  7  days  was  faxed  to  the  Community  Mental  Health  Team 
office. 

 On  3 June 2019,  the  Deceased  barricaded  himself in  his  own  home  and  severed  his jugular vein 
using a serrated  knife.  He  was  taken to  Manchester Royal  Infirmary and  suffered  a cardiac arrest 
en  route.  He  had  suffered  a  hypoxic  brain  injury and  died  as  a  result  of his  injuries  and  a  chest 
infection on  14 June 2019. 

5 

CORONE~SCONCERNS 

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:-

! heard evidence that there  is currently no system  in  place at Pennine Care  NHS Foundation  Trust 
for  quality assurance  of the  Discharge  Summary  Letters  which  are  sent to  General  Practitioners 
when  a patient is discharged from  in-patient care.  The evidence heard at the inquest and  recorded 
in  the  clinical  records  was  that  Mr Owen's  admission  to  Hollingworth  Ward  on  6  December 2018 
had  been  precipitated  by an  overdose;  that there were two further incidents of overdose during the 
admission;  that he was changeable in  relation  to  risk,  sometimes stating that he  wanted  to end  his 
own  life and  at other times  denying it and that he presented a significant risk  to  himself and  others 
if he became non-compliant with medication. 

The  Discharge  Letter  that  was  sent  to  Mr  Owen's  GP  on  6  February  2019  was  prepared  by  a 
doctor who  had  little involvement in  his care  and was  not counter-checked  by a senior clinician.  It 
omitted references to the overdoses and was erroneous in stating that there  had been 'no issues or 
incidents'  during  the  admission;  that  the  Deceased  'never  showed  any  DSH  behaviour  as  an 
inpatient'  and  that  'we  did  not  see  any SH  behaviour or expressed  thought  from  Sean  during  his 
admission.'  The letter made no reference to the significant risk associated with  non-compliance. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In  my opinion  action  should  be taken to  prevent future deaths and  I believe each of you  respectively 
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  21 
December 2020. I,  the Area 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 . 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons namely:-

(sister of the Deceased) 

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 from.  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: 

23 October 2020 

Signed:

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 Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
Corporate Services 
Trust Headquarters 
225 Old Street 
Ashton Under Lyne 
Lancashire 
OL6 7SF 

Telephone: 

21st December 2020 

Private & Confidential 

Ms C McKenna 
HM Area Coroner 
HM Coroner’s Court 
Floors 2 & 3, Newgate House, 
Newgate 
Rochdale 
OL16 1AT 

Dear Ms McKenna 

I write in response to your Regulation 28 report dated 23rd October 2020 and in 
respect of the concern you have highlighted after hearing evidence of the inquest of 
Mr Sean Owen. 

Your concern has been reviewed and Pennine Care’s response is outlined below. 

Coroners Concern 

I heard evidence that there is currently no system in place at Pennine Care NHS 
Foundation Trust for quality assurance of the Discharge Summary Letters which are 
sent to General Practitioners when a patient is discharged from Inpatient care. The 
evidence heard at the inquest and recorded in the clinical records was that Mr 
Owen’s admission to Hollingworth ward on 6th December 2018 had been precipitated 
by an overdose; that there were two further incidents of overdose during the 
admission; that he was changeable in relation to risk, sometimes stating that he 
wanted to end his own life and at other times denying it and that he presented a 
significant risk to himself and others if he became non-compliant with medication. 

The discharge letter that was sent to Mr Owen’s GP on 6th February 2019 was 
prepared by a doctor who had little involvement in his care and was not counter 
checked by a senior clinician. It omitted references to the overdoses and was 
erroneous in stating that there had been ‘no issues or incidents’ during the 
admission; that the Deceased ‘never showed any DSH behaviour as an inpatient’ 
and that ‘we did not see and SH behaviour or expressed thought from Sean during 
his admission.’ The letter made no reference to the significant risk associated with 
non-compliance. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Response 

Mental Health Services in Heywood, Middleton and Rochdale have reviewed 
processes since the untimely death of Mr Sean Owen. 

The Clinical Director for the Borough has established process that ensures: 

•  All new medical trainees receive a presentation regarding the standards 

expected and process of writing admission/discharge summaries. 

•  During their first month working on the wards all new trainees have their 

written admission/discharge summaries checked and discussed at the ward 
round held prior to discharge of the patient. A senior doctor checks the 
documentation. 

•  Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust have issued all new trainees with 

laptops, with the expectation that the admission/discharge summary starts at 
the point of admission as a live document that can be added to/updated as 
appropriate throughout the admission.  Therefore this provides a document 
ready for the discharge ward round for final additions which is then forwarded 
to the GP. 

•  Documentation review is now incorporated in trainees’ weekly supervision. 

The revised process will be subject to an audit. 

The template for the admission is attached. 

To ensure wider learning, the concerns highlighted and HMR’s response were 
discussed at the senior medical management team recently. Verbal assurances 
were received from all other Boroughs across PCFT with regards to consent 
processes and a plan for the Associate Medical Directors to facilitate a dedicated 
meeting to discuss and agree sharing best practice. 

I trust this response assures you that the Trust has taken your concern seriously and 
has thoroughly reviewed the issues raised. 

Yours sincerely  

Deputy Medical Director 

E: 

DX summary.docx

Related reports

Other reports by Catherine McKenna

See all →

More reports categorised “Mental heath related deaths”

See all →

Track Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Pennine Care 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.