Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2020

Stanley Babbs

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2020-0225, written 6 Nov 2020. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report6 Nov 2020
Reference2020-0225
DeceasedStanley Babbs
CoronerNadia Persaud
Coroner areaEast London
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
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.

East London Coroners

MISS N PERSAUD
SENIOR CORONER

Walthamstow Coroner's Court, Queens Road Walthamstow, E17 8QP
Telephone 020 8496 5000 Email: coroners@walthamforest.gov.uk

REF: 103771
6" November 2020

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

EE bict Executive, The Barking Havering and Redbridge University NHS Trust, Queen's

Hospital, Rom Valley Way, Romford, Essex, RM7 OAG iii

CORONER

| am Nadia Persaud Senior Coroner for East London

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.

http://www. legistation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5/paragraph/7

http://www. legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/part/7/made

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On the 25" April 2016 | commenced an investigation into the death of Stanley Alfred Babbs. The
investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest on the 30" October 2020. The conclusion of the
Inquest was a narrative conclusion:

Mr Stanley Babbs died as a result of the administration of 1V contrast for a CT scan. An individualised,
personal evaluation and assessment was not carried out before the administration of contrast. A robust
risk/benefit analysis had not been carried out prior to the administration of contrast. Mr Babbs had not
been informed of the risks of administration of contrast. Communication between the referring clinician
and the radiology team was deficient. Had a personalised assessment, risk/benefit analysis and robust
communication been carried out, on the balance of probabilities, the CT scan with contrast would not
have been performed and his death at that time would have been avoided,

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

Mr Stanley Babbs was 91 years old. He had a past medical history of chronic kidney disease (stage 4),
diabetes and heart failure. He had been generaily well in 2015 but was noted on blood tests to have a
tow haemoglobin. His haemoglobin was within the target range for a patient with chronic kidney
disease. Mr Babbs was referred to a gastroenterologist by his general practitioner. The
gastroenterologist considered that a CT scan would be required to exclude a possible malignancy. Other
than the chronically low haemoglobin, there were no other clinical indicators of malignancy. The CT scan

was requested and a radiologist agreed that a contrast CT scan could take place, with appropriate
hydration being administered. On the 21% January 2016 a contrast CT scan took place. Following this Mr
Babbs became unwell and blood tests taken on the 25" January 2016 showed a very raised creatinine.
He was diagnosed with a contrast induced acute kidney injury and admitted to hospital. During
hospitalisation he required a catheter. Sadly, he succumbed to sepsis from a urinary tract infection and
passed away in hospital on the 16" February 2016.

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. tn the circumstances it is my statutory
duty to report to you.

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows. —

The Royal College of Radiologist Standards for Intravascular Contrast Administration requires that the
ultimate responsibility for intravascular contrast administration rests with the person who prescribes it.

The Standards identify risk factors for acute kidney injury, to include chronic kidney disease (eGFR of less
than 40); heart failure and age 75 years or older. The Standards identify that for those at risk of acute
kidney injury, the dose of non-ionic iodine based contrast medium should be minimised, taking into
consideration the indication and patient’s body weight.

It was noted at the Inquest hearing that a Practice Group Direction has been prepared for the
administration of contrast to persons who are not at increased risk (those with an eGFR greater than 30).
There is no such Practice Group Direction or other prescribing safeguards for patients at higher risk
(eGFR lower than 30).

The clinical lead for radiology at the Trust stated in his oral evidence that there is no prescription for
contrast. This is so, even though contrast is a prescription only medicine. The clinical lead stated that a
radiologist will simply say “contrast” or “no contrast”. This is the case even for those patients who have
a high risk of a contrast induced acute kidney injury.

Patients with chronic kidney disease, diabetes, cardiac failure and aged over 75 have an up to 25% risk of
a contrast induced acute kidney injury. in these circumstances, it is concerning that contrast media (a
prescription only medicine) can be administered without a formal prescription, evidence of a careful
consideration of the dose and a clearly identified responsible clinician.

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 30%
December 2020. |, 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, the family
of Mr Babbs, the Royal College of Radiologists, the CQC and to the Director of Public Health

| 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.

06/11/2020

a a
Ms Nadia Persaud Senior Coroner East London

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 Barking Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals (PDF)
Ms N.Persaud,

Senior Coroner for East London,
Walthamstow Coroner’s Court,
Queens Road,

Walthamstow,

London. E17 8QP

Date: 12 January 2021

Barking, Havering and Redbridge NHS)

University Hospitals
NHS Trust

Cancer & Clinical Support Division
Queen's Hospital
Rom Valley Way, Romford, Essex RM7 OAG

Tel: 01708 435 000
www.bhrhospitals.nhs.uk
W @BHRUT_NHS

RE: Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths Investigation Report
Following inquest regarding the Death of Stanley Babb’s

Dear Ms Persaud,

BHR acknowledges the Regulation 28 and the Coroner’s concerns in relation to the use of contrast for Radiological
procedures within BHR Hospitals.

A comprehensive Action plan has been developed by the department to improve safety across a number of

issues.

The following actions have been implemented to ensure safe practice with all patients undergoing a CT scan with

IV contrast.

e Communicate new IV Contrast protocol. (As per Action 1 on the plan)

Completed documents approved by Medicines Optimisation Group (“MOG”) and placed on Trust intranet;
communicated to staff email, WhatsApp and supported by a demonstration video on YouTube on how to

authorise requests;

e We have communicated to all radiologists using multiple platforms (radiologist huddle, governance
meeting, email and REALM) on the importance of having personalised evaluation & assessment of patients
having IV contrast with an EGFR of less 30 especially patients who have multiple risk factors. (As per

action 2 within plan)

e Recording radiologist authorisation decisions on all patient request forms and uploading the form onto the
RIS system. For radiologists who don't have access to the form during on call or home reporting, the
decision will be recorded on the RIS system. This includes patients having an eGFR of less than 30. (As per

action 2 on the plan)

e The radiographers & admin staff have undergone specific training so that they are aware of how to upload
these decisions correctly onto the patients file to ensure safe conveyance of this information. (As per
action 7 on the plan)

a epate OCLPartners

SMOKEFREE

Chief Executive:

e Practice Group Direction (“PGD”) approval for Radiographers/updating internal protocol to enable
Radiographers to inject IV contrast on a Radiologist’s prescription, for patients with eGFR between 30 and
45

The prepared PGDs are linked to SOPs agreed within Radiology and discussed at the Divisional Quality and Safety
Meeting held 2/12/20. The document is currently in the final stages of being approved for use across BHRUT

e Prescriptions for CT IV contrast for patients with eGFR < 30 to ensure these requests are appropriately
authorised. (As per action 4 on Plan)

e Creating a prescription sheet for all patients with eGFR < 30, or with any risk factor outside PGD (as per
point 13 within the action plan)

The prescription sheet will be Included within the PGD

e Creating a new Radiology request form to incorporate safeguards for patients with abnormal renal
function and to confirm that the clinician has indicated the use of contrast and if a discussion has taken
place with the patient about the use of contrast.

Form created and will be in use by 31/12/20. (As per action 6 on plan)

e Scans on direct access pathway from ED which need contrast e.g. CT Angiogram for stroke will require a
prescription for contrast in the patients notes. (As per action 9 on plan)

Agreement that the ED clinician will sign prescription for IV contrast to cover the radiographer in patient’s notes
and scanned on to the RIS system. This is an interim measure which will be reviewed post PGD sign off

e Contrast Dose: now specified as 1ml/Kg with maximum of 100ml (medical scales have been ordered for all
scanners and should be in place soon). (As per action 12 on plan)

To accompany this correspondence we have attached:

- The full Action Plan that the Trust has developed for the Radiology department to improve safety
both immediately and in the long term

- New Radiology request form

- New prescription form- Patient Specific Authorisation (PSA) Document

This plan has been clinically led, the Radiology Clinical Leads developing the actions with input from their Medical
and AHP colleagues. There has also been discussion at the Clinical reference group chaired by the Medical

Director within the Trust.

Yours sincerely,

Chief Executive

Related reports

Other reports by Nadia Persaud

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.