Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2020
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2020-0284, written 14 Dec 2020. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 14 Dec 2020 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2020-0284 |
| Deceased | Christopher Swain |
| Coroner | Penelope Schofield |
| Coroner area | West Sussex |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Suicide (from 2015) · Mental Health related deaths |
| Organisation named | Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: Chief Executive Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust Swandean Arundel Road Worthing West Sussex BN13 3EP 1 CORONER I am PENELOPE SCHOFIELD, senior coroner, for the coroner area of WEST SUSSEX 2 CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS I 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. 3 INVESTIGATION and INQU EST On On September 2019 I commenced an investigation into the death of in Christopher Patrick Swain, aged 38, The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest (which had been held with a Jury) on 12th October 2020. The conclusion of the Jury was a Narrative Conclusion namely ”Christopher Patrick Swain was detained at Langley Green Hospital from 19th September 2019 until the date of his death 22nd September 2019. Chris was found in his room, at Langley Green Hospital having used a ligature around his neck on the evening of 22nd September 2019, where he had committed suicide whilst the balance of his mind was disturbed. During his time at Langley Green Hospital no formal review, care plan or adequate risk assessment was carried out in respect of his mental health. The nursing and clinical records were not kept in accordance with the trust health and record policy, as no adequate risk assessment was carried out prior to the decrease in the level of Chris's observations or at any point during Chris's stay. There was no recorded evidence that any therapeutic engagement has taken place as there is no satisfactory care plan. On the 22nd September 2019, when Chris was found by hospital staff, it is more likely than not he had been deceased for some time. Chris deliberately took his life and intended to do so.” Following the Inquest I indicated that I was minded to make a Regulation 28 report but 1 indicated that I would like to hear submissions from the Interested Persons. Submissioss have since been received from those representing the family and those representing the Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust I have fully considered these submissions prior to preparing this report. 4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH On 22rd September 2019 Christopher Swain, who had been detained under Section 3 Mental Health Act 1983, was found unresponsive in his room on Coral Ward at Langley Green Hospital having tied a ligature around his neck. . Emergency services were called and CPR was attempted but, sadly, Mr Swain was confirmed deceased by paramedics at 23:54 hours. 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. – a) During the evidence there was some confusion amongst staff as to what was required of them when carrying out observations patients in their rooms. There were different practices adopted by different staff and there appeared to be a custom of not enteriing a patient’s room on the hourly observations so as not to disturb the patients. Sadly because of this practice it was unclear when Christopher had last been seen alive. Whilst the Trust has indicated that all staff have received further training in respect of this I am still not convinved that it is clear as to what is required by staff. b) Following the evidence the Jury concluded:- (a) that during Christopher’s time at Langley Green Hospital no formal review, care plan or adequate risk assessment was carried out in respect of his mental health. (b) that the nursing and clinical records were not kept in accordance with the trust health and record policy. (c) that here was no recorded evidence that any therapeutic engagement has taken place during the period of Christopher’s short stay. Whilst the Trust have indicated that there has been a review of the professional conduct of all staff involved in this case this does not allay my concerns that these practices are limited to just those staff involved in this case. c) Failure to provide staff to accompany a sectioned patient to the emergency department of another Hosptial for treatment for a physical condition. Requesting family member to undertake this role puts the patient and/or the family at risk 6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe your organisation] have the power to take such action. 7 YOUR RESPONSE 2 You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 8th February 2021. I, 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. 8 COPIES and PUBLICATION I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons:- , wife of the deceased. , father 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 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 14th December 2020 Penelope Schofield, Senior Coroner 3
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.
Private & Confidential
Her Majesty’s Coroners Court
The Senior Coroner, Ms Penelope Schofield
Centenary House
Durrington Lane
Worthing
BN13 2PQ
Email:
EMAIL:
Swandean - Trust HQ
Arundel Road
Worthing
West Sussex
BN13 3EP
Tel:
21st January 2021
Dear Mrs Schofield
Thank you for your letter of 15th December and Regulation 28 and 29 of the Coroner's
(Investigations) Regulations 2013 following the inquest of Christopher Patrick Swain which
concluded on 12th October 2020.
As you heard during the inquest, there has been considerable reflection and action, within
the Trust, following Christopher’s tragic death at Langley Green Hospital on 22nd
September 2019.
Christopher did not receive the standard of care we expect in the hospital. The clinical
team immediately undertook an investigation in to the events leading up to Christopher’s
death and identified a number of actions and learning that has been shared and cascaded
within Langley Green Hospital and across our acute inpatient services. In order to provide
you assurance that service improvements have indeed been made Trust-wide, and not just
at Langley Green Hospital, my Operational and Service Directors within all inpatient
settings have provided me with a full update on the improvements the Trust has made in
regards to the issues that you raised. In response to the matters of concern you raise
therefore, I shall address each point in turn, adopting your numbering below:
a) During the evidence there was some confusion amongst staff as to what was
required of them when carrying out observations on patients in their rooms. There
were different practices adopted by different staff and there appeared to be a
custom of not entering a patient’s room on the hourly observations so as not to
disturb the patients. Sadly because of this practice it was unclear when Christopher
had last been seen alive. Whilst the Trust has indicated that all staff have received
further training in respect of this I am still not convinced that it is clear as to what is
required by staff.
Chair:
Chief Executive:
Head office: Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Swandean, Arundel Road, Worthing, West Sussex, BN13 3EP
www.sussexpartnership.nhs.uk
A teaching trust of Brighton and Sussex Medical School
There has always, within the Trust, been a requirement on all acute inpatient hospital staff,
to practice in accordance with the Trust's Therapeutic Engagement and Observation
Policy. I was saddened to hear that some of our temporary staff and other Trust staff did
not adhere to this Policy during Christopher’s admission to Langley Green Hospital. The
Policy states 'when a patient appears to be sleeping/ resting, regardless of the time of day
staff must continue to monitor their mental and physical health noticing changes in the
body position' - importantly it goes on to state 'If a member of staff is not able to observe
the patient move or breathe they must ensure the person is conscious which will require
entering the bedroom'. In addition to this, the Trust's observation recording sheet as
appended to the Policy, states 'If you are unable to observe the patient move or breathe
you must ensure that the person is conscious which will require entering the bedroom'.
The observation recording sheet used in Christopher's care was however out of date as it
was the one from the previous policy (2017 policy) which stated that ‘General observations
continue at night which will require entering the bedroom to ensure the patient is mentally
settled and not experiencing any physical distress or loss of vital signs'. My Clinical and
Operational inpatient services Directors inform me that staff, Trust-wide, are aware that a
bedroom must be entered where staff cannot ascertain signs of life. This duty is to be
conducted in accordance with Code of Practice 8.4 [as included in the Mental Health Act
1983] which states that 'Hospital staff should make conscious efforts to respect the privacy
and dignity of patients as far as possible while maintaining safety' as in psychiatry, there is
a requirement to balance the need for promoting sleep/rest and the requirement to make
all environments and care the least restrictive whilst ensuring a person's remains safe at
all times.
In light of the clinical care review conducted in the wake of Christopher’s death, the Trust
reconsidered its Therapeutic Engagement and Observation Policy. I and my Clinical,
Operational and Service Directors were satisfied that no changes to Policy were required.
The issue that arose in Christopher’s care was quite clearly, a lack of adherence to Trust
Policy by staff. To prevent reoccurrence of non-compliance with Trust Policy within
Langley Green Hospital and elsewhere within the Trust, the following actions were taken
across all inpatient services:
i. Guidance on observations was refreshed to support staff competency and
implementation. All staff now have a pocket guide z card on conducting
observations, this can be utilised as an aide memoire and reference guide. The
pocket z card describes that 'at least once per shift a member of staff must set
aside dedicated time to engage positively and collaboratively with the patient and to
assess the current risks and mental state of the individual 'whilst on an acute
inpatient ward', to engage therapeutically on each occasion of observation’; As the
opportunity for therapeutic engagement depends on the willingness of the individual
and their activity at the time, the onus and importance of having a Therapeutic
Engagement and Observation Policy in place is that the observations themselves
can enable positive therapeutic relationships by establishing good rapport, and
being aware of patient's
individual needs and changes
in presentation;
Page 2 of 5
ii. An easy read poster guide on observations is also now available on all inpatient
wards.
iii. Training and competencies on completing observations has been updated. This
training is mandatory and must be completed annually and at induction for all
agency and bank staff before they are able to commence a shift. There has been
evidence submitted of staff completion and ongoing adherence to the requirement
for each staff member to complete the induction checklist which includes
observations. As of December 2020 there is a 100% compliance for staff who have
completed training in Therapeutic Engagement and Observation competency
assessments at Langley Green Hospital.
iv. All substantive, bank and Agency staff have access to Carenotes. All observations
are now contemporaneously recorded.
b) Following the evidence, the Jury concluded:
(a) that during Christopher’s time at Langley Green Hospital no formal review, care
plan or adequate risk assessment was carried out in respect of his mental
health.
The absence of clinical documentation for Christopher during his admission to Langley
Green Hospital was not completed to an expected standard in accordance with Trust
Policy. The Trust therefore completed a review of professional conduct of all the staff
involved in Christopher’s care through HR processes and made referrals to relevant
Regulatory bodies. The Langley Green Hospital Leadership team and Trust took
immediate action to prevent reoccurrence of any non-compliance with Trust Policy
including an immediate review of all care plans, risk assessments and clinical
documentation. This has been maintained through audit and competency plans. Feedback
was given to the whole team by the Trust Deputy Chief Nurse due to the seriousness and
the immediate requirement to reflect and improve. There have, since Christopher's death,
been daily risk assessment audit, daily huddles as well as notes audits by Ward Managers
with oversight by the senior leadership team. These audits demonstrate as of December
2020 there is 100% adherence to the training in quality record keeping.
(b) that the nursing and clinical records were not kept in accordance with the trust
health and record policy.
A new competency framework has been developed and introduced Trust wide to
strengthen our systems and processes which reinforces the requirement of stating on the
observation chart, the activity of the patient rather than ticking to evidence their presence
on the ward. Each member of the Trust inpatient Nursing Team has been required to
individually complete the competency check list and such is now integral to the Bank and
Agency staff induction checklists - Trust-wide. There is particular focus on this point
included in the Eight Steps to Quality and Safety poster now present in the nursing offices
across the Trust acute wards. The evidence of all Langley Green Hospital staff completion
and ongoing adherence to the requirement for each staff member to complete the
induction checklist, which includes observations, has already been submitted to the Court.
Page 3 of 5
Staff were supported with safety days which commenced in December 2019 with specific
training on Clinical Risk Assessment which focusses on professional responsibility,
accountability, and clinical curiosity.
(c) that there was no recorded evidence that any therapeutic engagement has
taken place during the period of Christopher’s short stay.
Whilst the Trust have indicated that there has been a review of the professional
conduct of all staff involved in this case this does not allay my concerns that these
practices are limited to just those staff involved in this case.
The learning and actions taken following the serious incident review into Christopher’s
death has been shared across the Trust. I accept that there was an absence of
documentation on Christopher’s care during the period of his admission. It was
acknowledged at inquest and during the Serious Incident review that the nurse in charge
and allocated nurses did not complete the care plans, risk assessment and Carenotes shift
entries to an expected standard, if at all, and that the Nurse did not as appropriate,
delegate this to colleagues. I, the Trust, and Langley Green Hospital team were extremely
concerned that this was the case, as not having appropriate documentation reduces a
teams’ ability to communicate risk and give instruction to staff as to the patients expected
outcomes. Therefore, a review of all the professional conduct of the staff involved was
completed at the time and managed through appropriate internal processes including HR
and referrals to relevant Regulatory bodies. From a systems perspective, all Trust inpatient
staff have completed competency checks in note writing and ongoing adherence is
monitored by Ward Managers who check the content of patient notes weekly in audit form
and complete spot checks on a daily basis.
c) Failure to provide staff to accompany a sectioned patient to the emergency
department of another Hospital for treatment for a physical condition. Requesting
family member to undertake this role puts the patient and/or the family at risk.
The Section 17 MHA 1983 Leave of Absence Policy provides for the Responsible Clinician
to grant a detained patient under their care leave of absence from the hospital where they
are liable to be detained.
Responsible Clinicians may grant leave for specific occasions or indefinite periods of time.
Responsible Clinicians may make leave subject to any conditions which they consider
necessary "in the interests of the patient or for the protection of the people" (27.9 MHA
Code of Practice 2015)
When completing a section 17 leave form, the Responsible Clinician should include any
conditions and support the patient would require during their period of leave. If escorted
leave is required the Responsible Clinician must state whose legal custody the patient is to
remain in by completing the appropriate tick box and naming the escort if they are not a
member of the nursing staff.
Page 4 of 5
In this case, the Responsible Clinician [Dr L] reviewed Christopher prior to his attendance
at the general hospital and his section 17 leave was formally prescribed by his doctor. This
leave form specified that Christopher was to have a hospital escort to the general hospital
noted that the family were accompanying him as he would have familiar faces
and Dr
with him for additional reassurance, in addition to staff. All actions as far as Trust Policy is
concerned, were in place when Christopher left Langley Green Hospital to attend the
general hospital. However, as noted at the inquest, the issue in this particular case is that
Trust Policy for escorted leave was not followed. The family are aware of this and my
clinical team have explained this to them in detail. I am assured that the weekly audits
being conducted by Ward Managers are ensuring that no patient leaves the Hospital
unaccompanied if they are granted section 17 leave for any purpose.
I hope my response herewith provides you with strong assurance of the measures the
Trust has taken to ensure its systems are more robust, and that the close monitoring of
staff adherence to Trust Policy following Christopher's tragic death, is being checked and
evaluated.
Yours sincerely
Chief Executive Officer
Page 5 of 5
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Sussex Partnership 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.