Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2021

Darren Adams

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2021-0125, written 29 Apr 2021. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report29 Apr 2021
Reference2021-0125
DeceasedDarren Adams
CoronerLorraine Harris
Coroner areaSouth Yorkshire (East)
CategoryState Custody related deaths · Mental Health related deaths · Suicide (from 2015) · Other related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published2

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.

REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1)

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS
THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1. Practice Plus Group, Hawker House 5-6 Napier Court, Napier Rd, Berkshire
RG1 8BW.

2. Resuscitation Council UK, 5'* Floor, Tavistock House North, Tavistock Square,
London. WC1H 9HR.

1.__| CORONER

| am Lorraine Harris, Assistant Coroner, for the coroner area of South Yorkshire
(East).

2. | 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.

3. | INVESTIGATION AND INQUEST

On 15" November 2017 | commenced an investigation into the death of Darren
Adams (DOB 30" March 1962). The investigation concluded at the end of the
inquest on 28" April 2021. The conclusion of the inquest was suicide, the medical
cause of death was 1a Hypoxic Brain Injury 1b Hanging.

4. | CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

On 7** November 2017 Darren Adams was transferred from HMP Garth (HMPG) to
HMP Lindholme (HMPL). It appears he believed, incorrectly, that there was a
Vulnerable Prisoner Unit (VPU) at HMPL. Staff at HMPG accepted Mr Adams had
asked about a VPU but the fact there was no such unit at HMPL was not relayed
back to him. There was no evidence to say that he would have been placed on a
VPU even if there had been one at HMPL. Mr Adams had a history of being
unsettled when moved, even within a prison. The jury found that there was
insufficient information regarding Mr Adam’s on his transfer and arrival at HMPL.
Within 24 hours of arrival his mental health deteriorated to such an extent he was
placed on an ACCT. There were insufficient records of his behaviour in the ACCT
and a full picture of his mental health was not recorded. Darren was alive at 0641
hours on 12" November 2017 but discovered ligatured in his cell at 0738 hours. The
officer discovering Mr Adams waited for additional staff assistance before
attempting to enter the cell however Darren had erected a barricade at his door
which caused an additional slight delay in accessing him. Once the door was
opened and barricade removed nursing staff from prison healthcare entered the
cell. The nursing staff carried out a clinical assessment but misdiagnosed him,

believing him to have hypostasis and rigor mortis. They decided not to commence
CPR. The nurses had previously been advised by the Prison Service and Probation
Ombudsman against commencing CPR when someone is obviously deceased. They
referred to the guidance “Guidance to support the decision-making process of when
not to perform Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in prisons and immigration removal
centre (IRC)”. When paramedics arrived their clinical assessment found no
hypostasis, no rigor mortis and they also stated he was still warm. They
commenced CPR and obtained a return of spontaneous circulation 4 times, the last
as he was conveyed to Doncaster Royal Infirmary (DRI). Once at DRI, after a period
of observation and tests Mr Adams was declared dead at 13" November 2017.

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 could 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 Nursing Staff misdiagnosed hypostasis. It was apparent in evidence that
they did not have a sufficient understanding of the process and how to
identify it.

2. The Nursing Staff misdiagnosed rigor mortis. It was apparent in evidence
that they did not have a sufficient understanding of the process and how to
identify it.

3. Management of the nurses accepted in evidence that more focus on the
identification of those conditions should have been covered in better depth
during the nurse’s life support training.

4. It was seen during the evidence that definitions in Annex A of the document
“Guidance to support the decision-making process of when not to perform
Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in prisons and immigration removal centre
(IRC)” could be confusing, for example the word “mottling” was interpreted
by different people in different ways (both lay and medical).

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and | believe your
organisation 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 24" June 2021. I, the Assistant 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 the following interested
persons:

- The family — represented by Ison Harrison Solicitors

- HMP Lindholme — represented by Government Legal Department

| have also sent it to the following people who may find it useful or of interest:
- Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons
- Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service
- The Prison and Probation Service Ombudsman
-__ Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths In Custody

lam also under a duty to send a copy of your responses to the Chief Coroner and all
interested persons who in my opinion should receive it.

| may also send your responses to any other person who | believe may find it useful
or of interest.

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 Assistant Coroner, at the time of your
response, about the release or the publication of your response.

Lorraing Harris (Signed Electronically)

29" April 2021

Responses

2 responses 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 Practice Plus Group (PDF)
Practice Plus Group 
Hawker House 
5-6 Napier Court 
Napier Road 
Reading 
Berkshire 
RG1 8BW 

Tel: 0333 999 2570 
Fax: 0333 200 4063 
practiceplusgroup.com 

Mrs L Harris 
HM Assistant Coroner for South Yorkshire (East District) 
Coroner’s Court and Office 
Crown Court 
College Road 
Doncaster 
DN1 3HS 

16 June 2021 

Dear Mrs Harris 

Regulation 28: Prevention of Future Deaths report, Darren Adams (Deceased) 

Thank you for your Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths Report issued to Practice Plus 

Group  following  the  inquest  touching  upon  the  death  of  Darren  Adams  at  HMP  Lindholme. 

Practice Plus Group would like to express its condolences to Mr Adams’ family and friends. 

Below you will find each of the matters of concern addressed in turn: 

Matter of Concern 1. The Nursing Staff misdiagnosed hypostasis. It was apparent in evidence 

that they did not have a sufficient understanding of the process and how to identify it. 

Response: This is addressed in the response to matter of concern 3. 

Matter of Concern 2. The Nursing Staff misdiagnosed rigor mortis. It was apparent in evidence 

that they did not have a sufficient understanding of the process and how to identify it. 

Response: This is addressed in the response to matter of concern 3. 

Matter of Concern 3. Management of the nurses accepted in evidence that more focus on the 

identification of those conditions should have been covered in better depth during the nurse’s 

life support training. 

Practice Plus Group Health and Rehabilitation Services Limited. Registered in England No 10498997 
Registered Office: Hawker House, 5-6 Napier Court, Napier Road, Reading, Berkshire RG1 8BW 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Response:  Practice  Plus  Group  acknowledges  the  matters  of  concern  raised  and  that  they 

relate  to  insufficient  understanding  by  staff  in  identification  of  hypostasis  and  rigor  mortis.  In 

order to address the concerns raised the following actions have been taken:  

•  Practice Plus Group mandates annual Intermediate Life Support Training (ILS) for all 

clinical staff in recognition of their critical role in providing pre hospital life support.  Non 

clinical  staff  are  trained  in  Basic  Life  Support  and  agency  staff  are  required  to  have 

undertaken ILS training and can access the training provided by Practice Plus Group. 

The  curriculum  for  PPG’s  ILS  training  has  been  adapted  by  our  training  provider  to 

include  prison  specific  scenarios.    The  training  is  delivered  by  Resuscitation  Council 

accredited trainers.  Following this inquest, the training provider has spoken to staff who 

have  been 

involved 

in  resuscitation  decision-making  scenarios 

to  hear  their 

experiences  and  understand  the  issues  that  are  faced,  including  the  challenges  of 

diagnosing hypostasis.  Our training provider has amended the content of the previously 

provided ILS course to include: 

(i) 

45-minute  theoretical  session  on  assessment  and  presentation,  factors  for 

consideration and recognition of rigor mortis and lividity; and 

(ii) 

Mandatory scenarios where decision-making is required  (previously these were 

optional).  

This change in curriculum has been agreed will take effect from July 2021.  

Supplementary, additional education days have been developed for on-site training of 

clinical staff.  These include a range of resuscitation scenarios to build staff confidence 

and encourage participation in group learning exercises; this is in addition to the ILS 

training provided. These simulation days are in the process of being rolled out across 

PPG’s sites, prioritising those where issues have been identified.  A simulation training 

event at HMP Lindholme is being scheduled for the end of September 2021. 

Records of training attendance and emergency scenario simulation events are kept on our 

Learning Management System to provide assurance of compliance with PPG requirements. 

Matter  of  Concern  4.  It  was  seen  during  the  evidence  that  definitions  in  Annex  A  of  the 

document  “Guidance  to  support  the  decision-making  process  of  when  not  to  perform 

Cardiopulmonary  Resuscitation  in  prisons  and  immigration  removal  centre  (IRC)”  could  be 

Page 2 of 3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 confusing, for example the word “mottling” was interpreted by different people in different ways 

(both lay and medical). 

Response: This guidance was issued by the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), 

Royal  College  of  Nursing  (RCN)  and  the  Royal  College  of  General  Practitioners  (RCGP)  in 

March 2016.  Therefore, the terminology sits outside the control of Practice Plus Group.  For 

Practice Plus Group we will: 

-  Teach clinical staff on how to diagnose death 

-  Teach our staff the practical meaning of the terminology used in the Resus Council 

UK guidance 

-  Raise the matter to NHS England by way of correspondence to indicate the concerns 

raised during this inquest. 

Practice Plus Group will ensure that any revisions to the guidance are taken into account in our 

training.   

Practice  Plus  Group  are  committed  to  providing  a  high  quality  healthcare  service  at  HMP 

Lindholme and to ensuring that those detained there are as safe as possible and receive the 

best quality care. Practice Plus Group is deeply sorry that Mr Adams died while receiving care 

from our service and we will ensure that the lessons learnt are not just implemented at HMP 

Lindholme but across Practice Plus Group’s services. 

I  trust  that  the  above  responses  provide  the  information  that  you  require  but  please  do  not 

hesitate to contact me if Practice Plus Group can be of any further assistance.  

Yours sincerely 

National Medical Director, Health in Justice Practice Plus Group 

Page 3 of 3
Response from Resuscitation Council UK (PDF)
Mrs L Harris 
Assistant Coroner 
Coroner’s Office,  
Doncaster Crown Court,  
College Road, 
Doncaster, 
South Yorkshire. 
DN1 3HS 

28 June 2021 

Dear Mrs Harris, 

Response of Resuscitation Council UK Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths  

1.  This concerns the death of Darren Adams (date of birth 30 March 1962). He died following hanging 

in his prison cell. The specific concern was that cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was mistakenly 

not started by the prison nursing staff as they misdiagnosed the presence of hypostasis and rigor 

mortis.  

2.  The decision not to start CPR was based on the guidance from the National Offender Management 

Service, Royal College of Nursing, and Royal College of General Practitioners – Guidance to support 

the decision making process of when not to perform Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in prisons and 

immigration removal centre (IRC) [March 2016].  

3.  The Coroner identified the following matters of concern at the Inquest: 

1.  The Nursing Staff misdiagnosed hypostasis. It was apparent in evidence that      they did not 

have a sufficient understanding of the process and how to identify it. 

2.  The Nursing Staff misdiagnosed rigor mortis. It was apparent in evidence that they did 

not have a sufficient understanding of the process and how to     identify it. 

3.  Management of the nurses accepted in evidence that more focus on the identification of 

those conditions should have been covered in better depth   during the nurse's life 

support training. 

4.  It was seen during the evidence that definitions in Annex A of the document "Guidance to 

support the decision-making process of when not to perform Cardiopulmonary 

Resuscitation in prisons and immigration removal centre (IRC)" could be confusing, for 

resus.org.uk 

5th Floor, Tavistock House North 
Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9HR 
Registered Charity Number 1168914 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 example the word "mottling" was interpreted by different people in different ways (both 

lay and medical). 

4.  The Resuscitation Council UK (RCUK) sets out its response below. Specifically, it has been reviewed 

by Dr 

, Professor 

, Professor 

 and Professor 

. 

All have expertise in the matters of concern. 

5.  The RCUK was not involved in the guidance document about CPR in prisons and immigration 

removal centres and was not involved in implementing the guidance and training in its use.  

6.  Training and clinical experience are required to be able to reliably diagnose irreversible death based 

on the presence of rigor mortis and hypostasis. Detailed training in the recognition of rigor mortis and 

hypostasis is outside the scope of RCUK training courses.  

7.  The RCUK encourages rescuers to start CPR and await more experienced help (e.g. a paramedic) to 

arrive to make decisions about stopping CPR when the diagnosis of irreversible death is uncertain. 

8.  The guidance for prisons explicitly states in section 2.7 – Staff who are not able to recognise rigor 

mortis should start resuscitation until advised otherwise by a competent member of staff. In our 

opinion, prison nursing staff are unlikely to have the experience to reliably diagnose rigor mortis and 

hypostasis. 

9.  The prison guidance is based on the Ambulance Service guidelines for ambulance staff to guide 

decision-making on when to start CPR. Ambulance paramedics routinely use this guidance in the UK 

and have training and, importantly, experience in its use.  

10. Rigor mortis and hypostasis are mentioned but not addressed in detail in RCUK adult Immediate and 

Advanced Life Support courses. The default position in the RCUK life support courses is to start CPR 

when the diagnosis of irreversible death is not certain. Further assessments based on heart rhythm 

(presence of asystole – 'flat line') and a lack of response to CPR (persistent asystole despite 20 

minutes of CPR) can help confirm the diagnosis of irreversible death.  

11. Finally, RCUK has shared this response with:  

5th Floor, Tavistock House North 
Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9HR 
Registered Charity Number 1168914 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a.  National Offender Management Service, Royal College of Nursing, and Royal College of 

General Practitioners who prepared the original guidance and has offered to liaise on any 

future update on their guidance.  

b.  RCUK Community and Ambulance Resuscitation (CARe) committee.   

Yours sincerely 

Dr 

On behalf of Resuscitation Council UK 

5th Floor, Tavistock House North 
Tavistock Square, London WC1H 9HR 
Registered Charity Number 1168914

Related reports

Other reports by Lorraine Harris

See all →

More reports categorised “State Custody related deaths”

See all →

Track State Custody related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching State Custody 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.