Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2021

Clive Rivers

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2021-0199, written 10 Jun 2021. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report10 Jun 2021
Reference2021-0199
DeceasedClive Rivers
CoronerAlison Mutch
Coroner areaManchester South
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths · Community health care · Other related deaths · Care Home Health related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published2

The report

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

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS   

   REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS  

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:    

NHS England & Secretary of State of Health  

1   CORONER  

I am Alison Mutch, Senior Coroner, for the Coroner Area of Greater 
Manchester South  

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 INQUEST  

On 8th February 2021 I commenced an investigation into the death of 
Clive Edward Rivers. The investigation concluded on the 28th May 2021 
and the conclusion was one of Died from Covid-19 caught whilst an 
inpatient at Tameside General Hospital and receiving immunomodulatory 
therapy prescribed for his skin condition. The medical cause of death was  
1a Covid-19 on a background of immunomodulatory treatment; II 
Seborrheic eczema, Peripheral Vascular Disease   

1  

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 4   CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH  

Clive Edward Rivers was admitted to Tameside General Hospital having  
fallen at home. Whilst an inpatient the dermatologist put him on 
methotrexate for his skin condition and requested for him to be vaccinated 
against Covid-19 due to his increased risk of contracting Covid-19. This 
did not happen due to it not being policy to vaccinate inpatients. He 
contracted Covid-19 in hospital whilst awaiting discharge. He was 
discharged home to sheltered accommodation with a care package and a 
requirement to isolate. He deteriorated with Covid-19 on his return home. 
He died at his home address, 
2021.   

, Grange House, on 5th February 

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.  –   

1.  Clive Rivers was vulnerable to Covid-19 by reason of his age but 
had to go into hospital as a result of a fall. He had a longstanding 
skin condition that caused him a great deal of distress and 
discomfort. Whilst an inpatient he was prescribed 
immunomodulatory therapy and the consultant dermatologist 
wanted him to be vaccinated due to the increased risk Covid-19 
presented to him both in terms of catching it and being able to 
recover from it. The inquest was told that whilst vaccines were 
available on the hospital site, they were at that time due to NHS 
policy only for staff not inpatients. Therefore, Mr Rivers was not 
vaccinated.  

2.  He tested negative for Covid-19 at the point he was medically 
optimised for discharge however delays in discharge planning 
including the required assessment under the Right to Reside policy 
meant that whilst awaiting discharge he contracted Covid-19.   
3.  The inquest heard that when he was discharged from hospital, he 

was known to have Covid-19. He was assessed under the national 
right to reside policy and it was deemed under that policy that he 
should be discharged back to sheltered accommodation where he 
would have to self-isolate with carers coming in at set points in the 
day to support him. He was found deceased by his carers after 
being left alone. The assessment framework did not appear to take 
into account his vulnerability to a rapid decline from Covid-19.  

2  

  
  
  
 
  
  
  
  
 6   ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN  

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I 
believe you 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 by 7th August 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 namely 
(family of deceased), who may 
find it useful or of interest.  

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   10th June 2021  

Alison Mutch HM Senior Coroner Manchester South  

3

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 Department of Health Social Care (PDF)
From Maggie Throup MP 
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Vaccines and Public Health 

39 Victoria Street 
London 
SW1H 0EU 

Ms Alison Patricia Mutch 
HM Senior Coroner, Greater Manchester South 
HM Coroner's Court 
1 Mount Tabor Street 
Stockport SK1 3AG 

8th October 2021 

Dear Ms Mutch, 

Thank you for your letter of 10 June 2021 to the Secretary of State for Health and Social 
Care about the death of Clive Edward Rivers.  I am replying as Minister with responsibility 
for Covid-19 vaccine deployment and I am grateful for the additional time in which to do so.  

Firstly, I would like to say how deeply sorry I was to read the circumstances of Mr Rivers’ 
death.  I can understand how deeply upsetting losing a loved one in such circumstances 
during the emergency period of the COVID-19 pandemic must be and I offer my most 
heartfelt condolences to Mr Rivers’ family and loved ones.   

In preparing this response, Departmental officials have made enquiries with NHS England 
and NHS Improvement (NHSEI), to which you also issued your report.  I will address each 
matter of concern in turn.  

In relation to your concern about the availability of Covid-19 vaccinations for hospital 
inpatients’ with increased clinical risk factors, it may be helpful if I explain that in 
determining vaccine prioritisation, the Government takes advice from the Joint Committee 
on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), which is the independent body made up of 
scientific and clinical experts who advise the Government on which vaccines the United 
Kingdom should use and provides advice on prioritisation at population level.  

The Government’s priority for the first phase of the COVID-19 vaccination programme was 
to reduce COVID-19 mortality and protect health and social care staff and systems.  This 
position was informed by the JCVI’s advice on prioritisation, which the Government 
accepted.  

For the first phase, the JCVI advised1 that the vaccine be given to care home residents and 
staff, as well as frontline health and social care workers, followed by those aged 50 and 

1 Priority groups for coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination: advice from the JCVI, 30 December 2020 - 
GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 

 
 
 
 above, in order of age and clinical risk factors.  Included in this, were those with underlying 
health conditions, which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality.  

Anyone in hospital and falling within the JCVI’s recommended groupings being invited for 
vaccination, would be eligible for the vaccine, subject to a clinical assessment of suitability 
on a case by case basis and local operational policies.  While there is no national guidance 
preventing hospitals from vaccinating hospital inpatients, operational decisions on who to 
offer a vaccine to, and in what settings, are made locally, and in the context of the JCVI’s 
advice.  

For individuals who are acutely unwell, the JCVI guidance, as stated in Chapter 14a of the 
Greenbook, advises against vaccination during acute illness.  If an individual has been 
infected by COVID-19, then they should be clear of COVID-19 infection prior to vaccination.  
This guidance has been in place since November 2020 and has remained unchanged. 

In relation to Mr Rivers’ discharge from hospital, I would like to assure you that it is our 
priority to ensure that everyone receives the right care, in the right place, at the right time.  
This includes ensuring that people are discharged safely from hospital to the most 
appropriate place, and that they receive the care and support they need.  

Daily morning board rounds to review every person and make decisions, informed by the 
criteria to reside, are the foundation for avoiding delays and improving outcomes for 
individuals.  Transfer from the ward to a dedicated discharge area should happen promptly.  

The criteria to reside tool2 equips clinical teams to have discussions and make decisions 
about whether a person needs to stay in an acute bed to receive care.  This should then 
lead to a plan concerning the resources and services required to support a safe and timely 
discharge of that person if they no longer need the support and services of an acute 
hospital. 

When patients are discharged from hospital needing support to recover at home, 
rehabilitation or short term care, or care in a residential setting, our discharge guidance3 
sets out that NHS organisations must work closely with adult social care colleagues, the 
care sector and the voluntary sector to arrange this care.  Our guidance also sets out the 
importance of local authority and adult social care staff working closely with hospital staff to 
make arrangements to support safe and timely discharge.  All patients (or their 
representative or advocate if they lack capacity) should be given information and advice 
when discharged, including who they can contact if their condition changes, how their 
needs will be assessed and the follow up support they will receive.  

People should expect to receive high quality personalised care including regular updates 
and sharing of information about the next steps in their care and treatment. This should 
include joint decision-making processes and clarity on plans for the person’s post-discharge 
care. 

2 Hospital discharge and community support: policy and operating model - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 

3 Hospital discharge and community support: policy and operating model - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 At system level, a ‘transfer of care hub’ should be in place (physically or virtually) to ensure 
that all relevant services can be linked in order to provide appropriate care and support.  
Transfer of care hubs will ensure information essential to the continued delivery of care and 
support is communicated and transferred to the relevant heath and care partners on 
discharge (including the outcome of the last COVID-19 test for that person, where relevant). 

Under the discharge pathways, all persons leaving hospital should receive a holistic welfare 
check to determine the level of support, including non-clinical factors like their physical, 
practical, social, psychological and financial needs.  The recovery and support provided 
post-discharge (including rehabilitation and reablement services) aims to help people return 
to the quality of life they had prior to their most recent admission. 

Every person who is discharged on pathways 1 to 3 should have an allocated case 
manager who will closely monitor and review progress to ensure the individual receives 
appropriate care without delay and that there is no delay in assessing and planning for any 
long-term support as soon as it is possible to form an accurate picture of likely need and 
options following a period of recovery after discharge. 

It is vitally important that local organisations and system-level leaders reflect carefully on, 
and take learnings from, the circumstances of deaths related to the Covid-19 pandemic, 
such as that of Mr Rivers, and I am grateful to you for bringing these concerns to my 
attention.  It is right that there is an active and continuous process of learning, adapting and 
responding to the challenges of the Covid-19 pandemic and you will know that the Prime 
Minister has announced that there will be a full statutory inquiry into the Government’s 
response to the Covid-19 pandemic, beginning in Spring 2022, to identify national 
learnings. 

I am advised that the NHS in Greater Manchester has looked carefully at how Mr Rivers 
became infected with Covid-19 as well as the circumstances of his discharge from hospital, 
which I understand was explained in evidence to the inquest into his death.  

Finally, you may wish to note that my officials have shared your report with the Care Quality 
Commission, the independent regulator for quality, and with the Healthcare Safety 
Investigation Branch (HSIB) to support its intelligence monitoring of patient safety risks.  
The HSIB conducts national patient safety investigations where certain criteria are met.   

I hope this response is helpful. 

MAGGIE THROUP
Response from NHS England and NHS Improvement (PDF)
Ms Alison Mutch, Senior Coroner 
Manchester South 
Coroner's Court 
1 Mount Tabor Street 
Stockport 
SK1 3AG 

By email to: coroners.office@stockport.gov.uk 

Dear Ms Mutch, 

National Medical Director 
& Interim Chief Executive, NHSI 
Skipton House 
80 London Road 
London 
SE1 6LH 

23rd September 2021 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Clive Rivers, died 5 February 
2021 

Thank you for your Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths (“PFD Report”) dated 10 
June 2021 concerning the death of Mr Clive Rivers on 5 February 2021. Firstly, I would like 
to express my deep condolences to Mr Rivers’s family.  

The inquest held on 8 February 2021 concluded that Mr Rivers’s death was a result of 
Covid-19 on a background of immunomodulatory treatment.  

Following the inquest, concerns were raised via a PFD Report to NHS England, specifically 
in relation to the following points: 

1. Clive Rivers was vulnerable to Covid-19 by reason of his age but had to go into hospital
as a result of a fall. He had a longstanding skin condition that caused him a great deal of
distress and discomfort. Whilst an inpatient he was prescribed immunomodulatory therapy
and the consultant dermatologist wanted him to be vaccinated due to the increased risk
Covid-19 presented to him both in terms of catching it and being able to recover from it. The
inquest was told that whilst vaccines were available on the hospital site, they were at that
time due to NHS policy only for staff not inpatients. Therefore, Mr Rivers was not vaccinated;

2. He tested negative for Covid-19 at the point he was medically optimised for discharge
however delays in discharge planning including the required assessment under the Right to
Reside policy meant that whilst awaiting discharge he contracted Covid-19;

3. The inquest heard that when he was discharged from hospital, he was known to have
Covid-19. He was assessed under the national right to reside policy and it was deemed
under that policy that he should be discharged back to sheltered accommodation where he
would have to self-isolate with carers coming in at set points in the day to support him. He
was found deceased by his carers after being left alone. The assessment framework did not
appear to take into account his vulnerability to a rapid decline from Covid-19.

Please see below answers to each individual point of concern raised: 

Point 1: 

On 30 December 2020 the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation issued the 
following guidance: 

NHS England and NHS Improvement 

 “Phase 1 – direct prevention of mortality and supporting the NHS and social care system 

JCVI advises that the first priorities for the COVID-19 vaccination programme should be the 
prevention of mortality and the maintenance of the health and social care systems. As the 
risk of mortality from COVID-19 increases with age, prioritisation is primarily based on age. 
The order of priority for each group in the population corresponds with data on the number of 
individuals who would need to be vaccinated to prevent one death, estimated from UK data 
obtained from March to June 2020 (see reference 3): 

1.  residents in a care home for older adults and their carers 
2.  all those 80 years of age and over and frontline health and social care workers 
3.   all those 75 years of age and over 
4.  all those 70 years of age and over and clinically extremely vulnerable 

individuals[footnote 1] 

5.  all those 65 years of age and over 
6.  all individuals aged 16 years[footnote 2] to 64 years with underlying health conditions 

which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality[footnote 3] 

7.  all those 60 years of age and over 
8.  all those 55 years of age and over 
9.  all those 50 years of age and over” 

Full details of this guidance can be found here: Joint Committee on Vaccination and 
Immunisation: advice on priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, 30 December 2020 - 
GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) 

I am also aware that a letter went out to the wider healthcare sector on the 4th December 
2020, prior to the vaccination programme commencing, indicating at that stage that 
vaccination of inpatients could occur in line with JCVI guidance for cohort one.   There was 
no further correspondence regarding the vaccination of inpatients from the national 
Programme until May 2021 regarding the vaccination of people with Severe Mental Illness 
(SMI), learning disability and dementia.   

The guidance C1399-Updated-JCVI-guidance-for-vaccinating-immunosuppressed-
individuals-with-third-primary-dose.pdf (england.nhs.uk) states that:  

 If the individual is receiving care within a hospital that operates as a hospital hub and there 
is available vaccine supply, we recommend the individual receives the vaccine on site in line 
with the consultant’s recommendation on timing.  

If it is not possible to offer the individual a vaccine on site, consultants should write clear 
advice to the individual’s GP specifying the optimal timing and any interaction with their 
current treatment. The individual should then receive their vaccination through a PCN 
grouping-led site. 

Point 2:  

The National Hospital Discharge policy (August 2020 version which was in place at the time) 
set out the Criteria to Reside in acute settings. In the policy, it is clear that once an individual 
no longer meets the Criteria to Reside, they should, where possible, be discharged on that 
day and ideally by 5pm. The Criteria to Reside is a framework for clinicians to use to guide 
decision-making. Clinical exceptions may occur but must be warranted and justified. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Point 3: 

Public Health England’s  guidance states that discharge of Covid-19 patients to their own 
home can be done when the patient’s clinical status is appropriate for discharge, for 
example, once assessed to have stable or recovering respiratory function, and any ongoing 
care needs can be met at home. The guidance states that people should be given clear 
safety-netting advice for what to do if their symptoms worsen. The complete guidance can 
be found here:  Guidance for stepdown of infection control precautions and discharging 
COVID-19 patients and asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infected patients - GOV.UK 
(www.gov.uk). The section ‘ Discharge of COVID-19 patient to own home’ is of most 
relevance. 

The National Hospital Discharge policy states that community health, social care and acute 
care staff need to work in full synchronisation (include housing professionals where 
necessary) to ensure people are discharged in a safe and timely manner. 

As part of the Short term rehabilitation/reablement-at-home review described in the August 
2020 version of the national policy, a professional supervision/case management model 
should be used and the case manager must review all people on their caseloads daily 
including the question: can we safely discharge this person? Post discharge, the case 
managers, in conjunction with the single point of access, will need to work with partners to 
ensure the staff and infrastructure are available to meet immediate care needs. 

Thank you for bringing these important patient safety issues to my attention and please do 
not hesitate to contact me should you need any further information. 

Yours sincerely, 

National Medical Director   
NHS England and NHS Improvement

Related reports

Other reports by Alison Mutch

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.