Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2021

William Simons

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2021-0133, written 4 May 2021. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report4 May 2021
Reference2021-0133
DeceasedWilliam Simons
CoronerJohn Ellery
Coroner areaShropshire, Telford and Wrekin
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

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

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

Chief Executive, Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital Trust 

CORONER 
I am Mr John Penhale Ellery, Senior Coroner, for the coroner area of Shropshire, Telford 
& Wrekin. 

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. 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 
On  the  16th  October  2020  I  commenced  an  investigation  into  the  death  of  the  late 
William Arthur John SIMONS, 93 years of age. The investigation concluded at the end of 
the inquest on the 20th and 27th day of April 2021. 
The conclusion of the inquest was that the deceased died following two falls the second 
of  which was the more significant and preventable.   

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 
Mr Simons was admitted to the Royal Shrewsbury Hospital by his GP on the 21st 
August 2020 where he stayed undergoing treatment. Before that treatment was 
completed there were two intervening events which caused or contributed to his 
death. The first was a fall on the 23rd August 2020 on Ward 22 F when he fell having 
been to the toilet. The nurse who escorted him waited outside but was called away 
to another patient. Mr Simons having finished left the toilet without using the call 
bell. He was found lying on the floor. It was later discovered he had fractured his hip 
and underwent surgery. On the 8th September 2020 then on Ward 22 T&O Mr 
Simons had a further fall when he was returned to his bed having been taken by 
wheelchair for a Doppler scan on his left leg. On returning Mr Simons to the ward no 
one was available and the porter assisted Mr Simons without a nurse. Mr Simons 
walked about 2 meters with his zimmer frame but lost his balance and fell back 
hitting the back of his head on the floor. Both falls contributed to his death with the 
second the more significant of the two.  

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 Tele-tracking system 

a) 

It  was  not  clear  what  the  purpose  was  of  a  doctor  expressing  a  preferred 
option  of  transport  (i.e.  by  trolley/bed)  if  that  doctor  did  not  have  sufficient 
information to make it.  

b)  Whilst  it became clear  that  that  option  was  subject  to review  by  the  nursing 
staff on the ward it was not clear why a doctor would not either liaise with the 
nursing staff or expressly make it clear that the nursing staff should make that 
assessment and inform the porters accordingly. 

c)  The  system  on  the  day  led  to  confusion  and  a  breakdown  in  communication 
with the patient being taken instead by wheelchair with his zimmer frame. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6 

7 

8 

9 

(2)  Assistance.  

It was established that assisting a patient to move meant by a member of the 
nursing staff and not a porter.  It should be clear what a porter is to do if no 
nursing staff is available. 

(3)  Risk awareness. 

 The porter did not know the patient’s level of risk of falls.  

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 
In  my  opinion  action  should  be  taken  to  prevent  future  deaths  and  I  believe  you  and 
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 29th June 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. 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 
I  have  sent  a  copy  of  my  report  to  the  Chief  Coroner  and  to  the  following  Interested 
Persons, Lyons Davidson, solicitors for the family.   
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. 

Mr John Penhale Ellery 
Senior Coroner 
Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin 

4th May 2021

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 Royal Shrewsbury Hospital (PDF)
Chief Executive’s Office 
Royal Shrewsbury Hospital 
Mytton Oak Road 
Shrewsbury 
SY3 8XQ 
Date  24 June  2021 

Mr J P Ellery 
HM Senior Coroner  
Shropshire, Telford & Wrekin Area 
Shirehall 
Abbey Foregate 
Shrewsbury 
SY2 6ND 

Dear Mr Ellery,  

Thank you for your letter dated 4 May 2021 issued under Regulation 28: Report to prevent 
future deaths, in relation to the risks you identified through the Inquest touching the death 
of the late William Arthur John Simons.  

I write to provide assurance that we have taken steps to resolve the issues highlighted in 
your letter.  

1.  Teletracking 

a. It  was  not  clear  what  the  purpose  was  of  a  doctor  expressing  a  preferred option 
of  transport (i.e.by  trolley/bed/chair) if  that  doctor  did  not  have sufficient information to 
make it.  
b) Whilst it became clear that, that option was subject to review by the nursing staff on the 
ward it was not clear why a doctor would not either liaise with the nursing staff or expressly 
make  it  clear  that  the  nursing  staff  should  make  that  assessment  and  inform  the  Porters 
accordingly. 
c)The  system  on the  day  led  to  confusion  and  a  breakdown  in  communication with 
the patient being taken instead by wheelchair with his zimmer frame. 

Actions Taken: 

The mode of transport to the department for the investigation for an inpatient is specified on 
the  form  by  the  doctor  making  the  request.  This  should  be  done  in  discussion  with  the 
nursing staff. However, the patient’s condition may change from the time of the request to 
the  investigation  being  undertaken  and  so  a  further  assessment  should  be  made  by  the 
registered nurse (RN) caring for the patient at the time of transfer of the patient.  

When  Mr  Simons  was  going  for  his  investigation,  it  was  appropriate  for  him  to  go  in  a 
wheelchair as he had been mobilising with the assistance of one member of staff and was 
comfortable sitting in a chair. However, there was no process in place for this assessment 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 or  documentation  of  it.  Following  the  Serious  Incident  investigation  a  process  was  put  in 
place whereby a form was generated by Radiology for the Porters to take to the ward for 
sign off by the Registered Nurse prior to transfer and on return to the ward. This included: 

 
 
 
 

 

Patient Details 
Any Infection Prevention Control  concerns 
Mode of transfer 
Whether  patient  required  escort  and  if  so  if  this  is  a  Registered  Nurse,  Student  or 
Healthcare Assistant. 
To be signed by the RN prior to transfer and on return 

Further actions taken since 4 May:  

 

 

 

 

A review of the form has taken place with all key staff, to ensure this is a dynamic 
risk assessment, and there is clear documentation for the RN caring for the patient 
prior to the patient being transferred to and from an investigation/procedure.  
A  Standard  Operating  Procedure  (SOP)  for  Transporting  Patients  to  and  from 
Radiology  has  been  put  in  place  and  this  new  process  has  been  included  in  that 
(enclosed).  
Snapshot audits of forms have been carried out by the Trust’s Quality Matrons. Audit 
results  will  be  discussed  at  ward  managers  meetings  to  highlight  any  areas  of 
concern.  
The  process,  including  roles  and  responsibilities,  will  be  included  in  a  new  wider 
Hospital  Transfer  Policy.  This  has  been  drafted  and  is  currently  going  through  the 
Trust’s ratification process.  

2.  Assistance 

It was established that assisting a patient to move meant by a member of the nursing staff 
and not a Porter.  It should be clear what a Porter is to do if no nursing staff are available. 

This was communicated as part of the SI and Porters DO NOT transfer patients from chair 
to wheelchair or bed without the assistance of a nurse when being transferred off or onto 
the ward. 

Action taken: 

As part of the response to the Regulation 28 this has been recommunicated across the 
Trust via: 

 
 

Trust wide safety alert (attached)  
A discussion at a Ward Manager’s meeting with the Director of Nursing on 12 May 
2021  to ensure that  a  Nurse  (either  a  Registered  Nurse or  a  Healthcare  Assistant) 
always assists the Porter with the transfer of the patient on their return to the ward 
from another department  

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 

A discussion with all Porters with the Head of Portering 
In  addition  a  letter  has  been  sent  to  each  individual  Porter  outlining  that  the 
responsibility  for  the  safe  transfer  of  the  patient  from  chair  to  wheelchair  or  from 
wheelchair  to  chair  or  bed,  is  the  responsibility  of  the  nursing  staff  caring  for  the 
patient.  If  a  Nurse  is  not  available  the  Porter  should  take  the  patient  in  the 
wheelchair to the ward desk and request Nurse assistance.  

3.  Risk Awareness. 

The Porter did not know the patient’s level of risk of falls. 

Action taken: 

Falls awareness training is currently being delivered by the Falls Practitioner to all Portering 
staff. This training includes making Porters aware of visual alerts that patients at risk of falls 
have in place, for example yellow wrist bands and icons both at their bed space and on the 
patient safety screens near the nurses’ station. The expectations around undertaking falls 
awareness  training  for  Porters  will  be  included  in  the  Procedure  for  Managing  Inpatient 
Falls. This training will now be delivered to Portering staff on induction and 3 yearly as part 
of statutory mandatory training for Porters. The training, in combination with a clear briefing 
from the Registered Nurse to the Porter transferring the patient, should ensure the Porter is 
aware of the individual risk for the patient being transferred.      

Thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention. I hope you are assured that I have 
taken  them  seriously  and  investigated  them  appropriately.  If  I  can  provide  any  further 
information, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address.  

Yours sincerely 

Chief Executive 

3

Related reports

Other reports by John Ellery

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.