Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2021
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2021-0327, written 4 Oct 2021. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 4 Oct 2021 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2021-0327 |
| Deceased | Hannah Royle |
| Coroner | Karen Henderson |
| Coroner area | West Sussex |
| Category | Child Death (from 2015) · Other related deaths |
| Organisation named | South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 2 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
Regulation 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest. REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 1 Chief Executive NHS England 2 Chief Executive Health Education England 3 Chief Executive NHS Digital 4 Chief Executive SECAMB 1 CORONER I am Karen Henderson, assistant coroner, for the coroner area of West Sussex Coroners Service 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 5th July 2020 I commenced an investigation into the death of Hannah Elizabeth ROYLE aged 16. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 29 July 2021. The conclusion of the Inquest was that the medical cause of death was: 1a. Hypoxic brain injury 1b. OOH cardiac arrest 1c. acute gastric volvulus 2. Global developmental delay – Autistic – non verbal, renal atrophy (single functioning kidney) I recorded a conclusion of natural causes contributed to by neglect 4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Hannah Elizabeth ROYLE was a 16 year old girl with a life-long severe learning disability. She was non-verbal and required care for all of her activities of daily living. She lived with her parents and with their support she attended school and had a full and active life within the limitations of her disabilities. Hannah had been generally fit and well until the 19th and then into 20th June 2020 when she first had some diarrhoea and then began vomiting. Her father phoned 111 service at 15.15 hours on 20th June 2020 for advice as he did not his wish to overburden the 999 service given the impact Covid pandemic was having on the emergency services. The advice received was a primary care physician would contact them within 12 hours. Hannah’s mother contaced 111 service again at or around 18.00 hours. She said Hannah’s condition had deteriorated in that she was continuing to retch, unable to tolerate any fluids, her abdomen was ‘tight as a drum’ and she was concerned Hannah had a ‘blockage’. The 111 call handler went through the algorithm for abdominal pain. On obtaining 3 ‘not Regulation 28 – After Inquest Document Template Updated 30/07/2021 sure’ answers he discussed this case with the on duty ‘clinical advisor’ who advised the call handler to ask further questions. After doing so, the call handler asked her mother to take Hannah to the emergency department at East Surrey Hospital. On the way to East Surrey hospital Hannah had a cardiorespiratory arrest. Her mother carried out cardiopulmonary resuscitation in their car until their arrival at the hospital when she was immediately intubated and ventilated and was successfully resuscitated and stabilised. Investigations at East Surrey Hospital diagnosed Hannah with a massive gastric volvulus. A nasogastric tube was inserted and drained 3.5 litres of gastric fluid. Shortly thereafter she was transferred to the Royal Surrey County Hospital, Guildford and underwent a successful laparotomy to release and correct the volvulus in the early hours of 21st June 2020. On 28th June 2020 Hannah was transferred back to East Surrey hospital having shown no signs of neurological recovery. A brain MRI scan confirmed Hannah had sustained an irreversible hypoxic brain injury at the time of the cardiorespiratory arrest. This was incompatible with life and Hannah was declared brainstem dead at 10.30 hours on 1st July 2020 at East Surrey Hospital, Redhill. Her parents kindly consented to organ donation. On the evidence I heard I am satisifed the 111 service failed to provide the appropriate triage for Hannah on the information provided to them by her parents. This resulted in a cardio-respiratory arrest arising from an avoidable delay in being adequately resuscitated either by prompt attendance of the emergency services or through earlier admission into hospital. 5 CORONER’S CONCERNS During the course of the investigation my inquiries 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. Both calls to the 111 service were significantly non-compliant; the call handlers did not correctly complete the algorithm, they did not take into consideration Hannah’s disabilities and inability to verbalise, they failed to recognise Hannah as a complex case requiring transfer to a more senior member of the 111 service despite Hannah’s parents providing sufficient information for that to be the case. 2. The 111 service does not have a sufficiently robust system to manage members of the public with underlying disabilities in that no accommodation is given for it in the completion of the algorithm. 3. The skill and expertise of the ‘clinical advisor’ was wholly inadequate for her position as she had no contemporaneous or relevant experience in working in an emergency department as a nurse. She was also insufficiently robust in her assessment and understanding of Hannah’s condition when the call handler contacted her for advice. 4. Members of the public who contact the 111 are ill-informed with a real risk they are being misled over the role and capability of the 111 service. There is little clarity or understanding by the public that it is based on following and completing an algorithm by individuals who have no need for any qualification in health care and who will only receive a short training programme after they are employed. Hannah’s parents indicated that if they knew this, they would have opted to ring 999 and the outcome would have been different. 5. The 111 service is not a ‘diagnostic’ service yet the ‘call handlers’ have been renamed ‘health advisors’. This is misleading to the public as it iimplies Regulation 28 – After Inquest Document Template Updated 30/07/2021 professionalism which is untrue given their underlying skills and unsubstantiated given it is their role to complete an algorithm. 6. The NHS pathway for ‘Abdominal Pain’ is insufficiently robust or sufficiently discriminatory to effectively deal with the myriad of potential symptoms associated with this complaint. 6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you (and/or your organisation) 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 21st December 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 1. and to the Local Safeguarding Board (where the deceased was 18). I have also sent it to Dr (CDOP). who may find it useful or of interest and to the Child Death Overview Panel I am also under a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner and all interested persons who in my opinion should receive it. I may also send a copy of your response to any person who I 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 coroner, at the time of your response about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner. 9 Dated: 04/10/2021 Karen HENDERSON Assistant Coroner for West Sussex Coroners Service Regulation 28 – After Inquest Document Template Updated 30/07/2021
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.
Dr Karen Henderson HM Assistant Coroner for West Sussex Centenary House Durrington Lane Worthing BN13 2PQ 7 and 8 Wellington Place Leeds West Yorkshire LS1 4AP 7th December 2021 Dear Dr Henderson NHS Digital Response to Regulation 28 Report – inquest touching the death of Hannah Royle I am writing in response to the Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths (“PFD”) report received from HM Assistant Coroner dated 4th October 2021. This follows the death of Hannah Royle who sadly passed away on 1st July 2020. This was followed by an investigation and inquest which concluded on 29th July 2021. I am Dr and am writing in my capacity as Chief Clinical Officer, NHS Pathways, NHS Digital. NHS Pathways is the clinical decision support software (CDSS) used by all 111 service providers, and some 999 ambulance trusts in England. For information, we have included a short summary of the functions that NHS Pathways performs and the governance that underpins it (containing background information on NHS Pathways) in Appendix A. I would like to reiterate my sincerest condolences to . I have had the opportunity to discuss the Regulation 28 report with representatives from NHS England, South East Coast Ambulance Service (SECAmb) and Health Education England to ensure that all aspects are responded to by the relevant party. In response to the matters of concern outlined in the report: 1. Both calls to the 111 service were significantly non-compliant; the call handlers did not www.digital.nhs.uk enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk correctly complete the algorithm, they did not take into consideration Hannah’s disabilities and inability to verbalise, they failed to recognise Hannah as a complex case requiring transfer to a more senior member of the 111 service despite Hannah’s parents providing sufficient information for that to be the case SECAmb have agreed to respond to this matter. 2. The 111 service does not have a sufficiently robust system to manage members of the public with underlying disabilities in that no accommodation is given for it in the completion of the algorithm As set out in my witness statement to HM Assistant Coroner dated 22 July 2021, NHS Pathways is a comprehensive decision support system, which assesses symptoms presented at the time of a call and signposts to next level of care. Therefore medical history (including disabilities) is not routinely enquired about as it could delay assessment of life-threatening symptoms, and it would not be clinically safe for non-clinical Health Advisors to assess the impact of a patient’s medical history. It would also not be safe or appropriate to apply blanket rules based on the presence of learning disabilities. However, where a certain medical history is relevant to a specific clinical problem, then NHS Pathways will present relevant questions to be asked. For example, within the chest pain pathway, the caller is asked if they have ever been diagnosed with a heart condition. There are functions within NHS Pathways that have been designed to support those who have learning or developmental needs, and to support Health Advisors to respond to declarations of medical history, principally through the complex calls and early exit functionality as detailed below. A key element of healthcare delivery is recognising when one is at the limit of one’s knowledge or understanding and escalating the matter appropriately. An important safety feature within NHS Pathways is the identification of a ‘complex call’. A complex call is defined as ‘any call which isn’t straightforward and where the Health Advisor determines that they are working at or beyond the limits of their knowledge’. In addition to this broad definition of a ‘complex call’, the following situations would also be classed as ‘complex’: a. Difficulty in obtaining adequate information; b. The caller being unable to prioritise a main symptom; c. Declared past medical history; and d. A call that relates to medication or a medical procedure Health Advisors are taught, as part of their core training by providers, about the definition of complex calls, the rationale for why these should be managed by a clinician, and how to transfer these using the system. They also spend time practising this through role play scenarios using the system. NHS Pathways has developed training materials and led sessions to support providers to manage complex calls. The NHS Pathways system provides a route for Health Advisors to take in the event of a complex call, and if they are unable to get sufficient information to complete a safe and thorough triage. This is called ‘Early Exit’. Early Exit results in a transfer to a clinician. The importance of utilising Early Exit is covered during NHS Pathways Core Training and embodied within the competencies that staff are audited against. Probing is also a vital skill throughout calls, which Health Advisors are trained on. It is often needed www.digital.nhs.uk enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk at the outset to establish the reason for the call, or the presence of any life-threatening problems. It is needed during the symptom assessment and it may be needed once a disposition has been conveyed, if there seems to be resistance to the outcome. It is also essential to realise when probing is not needed. This includes situations where ample information has been provided or situations where it is clear that even an endless amount of probing would not get a clear answer to a question. In these situations, Health Advisors must consider the safest alternative which, depending on the situation, may be to transfer to a clinician via the Early Exit function. At the time of Miss Royle’s inquest The NHS Pathways Training Team were in the process of developing additional learning content for all users of the system. This has subsequently been released and the content of this new material focuses on: a) The difference between a learning disability and a learning difficulty b) The causes of learning disabilities c) The health inequalities and healthcare access difficulties experienced by some people with a learning disability d) Strategies to aid communication over the phone with a person with a learning disability. This learning material was released on 7th September 2021 and is included in updated core mandatory training for new Health Advisors and Clinicians within NHS111 and 999. Similar material has also been developed and released for all existing staff, which will be delivered by providers. 3. The skill and expertise of the ‘clinical advisor’ was wholly inadequate for her position as she had no contemporaneous or relevant experience in working in an emergency department as a nurse. She was also insufficiently robust in her assessment and understanding of Hannah’s condition when the call handler contacted her for advice. Safe and appropriate use of NHS Pathways by NHS care providers is governed by way of a ‘Licence to Use’. The ‘Licence to Use’ is managed by NHS Digital and all providers using NHS Pathways must enter into and comply with it. It defines the type of Clinician that can potentially receive training to use NHS Pathways in a clinical capacity as follows: "Clinician" means either: (a) a registered nurse; or (b) a registered paramedic; or (c) any other personnel with an appropriate recognised clinical qualification as authorised and notified to End Users by the Authority from time to time, and which is selected by the End User to receive the necessary training to enable them to perform the role detailed in schedules 1 and 2; The criteria for employment is managed by the provider (in this case SECAmb) to ensure that the Clinicians employed have the appropriate qualifications, skills and experience. The provider is also responsible for the ongoing audit and performance management of Clinicians, which is also mandated through the Licence to Use. To this end the Licence to Use states: The End User is responsible for ensuring on an ongoing basis that each Clinician is at all times able to demonstrate the underpinning education, skill, experience and professional scope of practice to enable them to: • undertake autonomous holistic physical health and mental health assessments, which includes differential diagnosis; www.digital.nhs.uk enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk • direct an appropriate clinical management plan; and • refer or discharge patients with unscheduled and emergency health and social care needs. 4. Members of the public who contact the 111 are ill-informed with a real risk they are being misled over the role and capability of the 111 service. There is little clarity or understanding by the public that it is based on following and completing an algorithm by individuals who have no need for any qualification in health care and who will only receive a short training programme after they are employed. Hannah’s parents indicated that if they knew this, they would have opted to ring 999 and the outcome would have been different. NHS England have agreed to respond to this matter. 5. The 111 service is not a ‘diagnostic’ service yet the ‘call handlers’ have been renamed ‘health advisors’. This is misleading to the public as it implies Regulation 28 – After Inquest Document Template Updated 30/07/2021 professionalism which is untrue given their underlying skills and unsubstantiated given it is their role to complete an algorithm. NHS England have agreed to respond to this matter. 6. The NHS pathway for ‘Abdominal Pain’ is insufficiently robust or sufficiently discriminatory to effectively deal with the myriad of potential symptoms associated with this complaint. NHS Digital has a well-established procedure, the “clinical enquiries log”, for providers to submit issues and for these to be reviewed and responded to by NHS Pathways. The investigation carried out by NHS Pathways, following the enquiry by SECAmb, concluded that for such a non-verbal patient with learning needs, both of the calls from Hannah’s parents should have been considered as “complex calls” (as per Health Advisor training) and transferred to a Clinician for assessment, rather than following the pathway for abdominal pain. NHS Pathways subsequently undertook a review of the abdominal pain pathway with particular reference to abdominal emergencies, including intestinal obstruction as experienced by Hannah. The questions within NHS Pathways, which relate to symptoms of potential obstruction include: • Questions relation to features of life-threatening illness, which include questions about respiratory distress or shock. • A question about the presence of abdominal pain in the diarrhoea and vomiting pathways. • Critical illness questions including functional impairment (unable to carry out usual activities), being confused or being breathless. • Questions on severity of pain – either keeping still because of the pain or writhing/ rolling around because of pain. • A question about feculent vomiting. The review, which concluded in July 2021, was carried out in conjunction with the Royal College of Surgeons (Scotland) and Royal College of Emergency Medicine and concluded that the current www.digital.nhs.uk enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk questioning within NHS Pathways was robust in triaging symptoms that could relate to obstruction of the bowel. In addition, NHS Pathways invited comment regarding this particular case and the associated presentation of symptoms from Royal College of Surgeons (Scotland) and Royal College of Emergency Medicine, who recommended no further changes were required to the abdominal pain pathway. The NHS Pathways content is continually under review to take account of clinical issues, user feedback, the latest available data and evidence, guidelines from Royal Colleges and other respected bodies and Coroner feedback. Any changes to NHS Pathways clinical content are overseen by the National Clinical Governance Group (NCGG) and Coroner referrals are submitted to NCGG as a standing agenda item. NHS Digital takes its role in such inquiries and any PFD report received very seriously. NHS Digital wish to reassure the Coroner that it fully investigates and responds to PFD Reports accordingly. If I can be of any further assistance, please let me know. Yours sincerely Dr Chief Clinical Officer, NHS Pathways NHS Digital www.digital.nhs.uk enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk Appendix A Function of NHS Pathways BACKGROUND INFORMATION NHS Pathways is a programme providing the Clinical Decision Support System (CDSS) used in NHS 111 and half of English ambulance services. This triage system supports the remote assessment of over 1 8 million calls per annum. These calls are managed by non-clinical specially trained call handlers who refer the patient into suitable services based on the patient’s health needs at the time of the call. These call handlers are supported by clinicians who are able to provide advice and guidance or who can take over the call if the situation requires it. The system is built around a clinical hierarchy, meaning that life-threatening problems assessed at the start of the call trigger ambulance responses, progressing through to less urgent problems which require a less urgent response (or “ disposition”) in other settings. Governance of NHS Pathways The safety of the clinical triage process endpoints resulting from a 111 or 999 assessment using NHS Pathways, is overseen by the National Clinical Governance Group, hosted by the Royal College of General Practitioners. This group is made up of representatives from the relevant Medical Royal Colleges. Senior clinicians from the Colleges provide independent oversight and scrutiny of the NHS Pathways clinical content. Changes to the NHS Pathways clinical content cannot be made unless there is a majority agreement at NGCC. this independent oversight, NHS Pathways ensures its clinical content and Alongside assessment protocols are concordant with the latest advice from respected bodies that provide evidence and guidance for medical practice in the UK. In particular, we are concordant with the latest guidelines from: • • • NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence) The UK Resuscitation Council The UK Sepsis Trust www.digital.nhs.uk enquiries@nhsdigital.nhs.uk
Dr Karen Henderson HM Assistant Coroner for West Sussex 29 November 2021 Dear Madam Coroner Hannah Royle deceased I write in response to your Regulation 28 Prevention of Future Deaths report dated 4 October 2021. I was very much saddened to read of Hannah’s death and I would like to express my personal condolences to Senior members of the 111-service management team have met to discuss the concerns you raised and how best to address them. We have also liaised with NHS England and NHS Digital in order to ensure that all parts of your report are answered by the most appropriate organisation. Addressing your concerns as numbered in your report: 1 & 2 – failure to recognise a complex case and transfer to a more senior member of staff Our 111-service management team agree that this was a complex case and should have been transferred to a clinician. In order to ensure that call handlers fully understand the need to identify and refer such cases, the following actions have been taken: 1. Work has been undertaken on a focused area of learning known as a “Hot Topic” which was issued to all call handling staff in the 111 service in October 2021. A copy is attached. NHS Pathways has been designed to triage a symptom in an otherwise well, non-complex patient i.e. with no medical history and no medication issues. It will be noted that whilst there is no defined list of calls that are to be classified as complex, a wide range of circumstances could lead to the call being considered complex, including any patients with complex medical history or multiple unrelated symptoms, patients unable to prioritise a main symptom and patients who are unable to verbalise the answer to triage questions, for example those who are non-verbal. 2. Key skills is the name given to core training delivered to all members of staff quarterly. The content varies according to job role and is based upon required system updates, clinical updates and learning from incidents and events. The next key skills for Health Advisors and Emergency Medical Advisors will include a section on dealing with calls from or about patients who have a learning disability. A copy of the relevant part of the key skills course content is attached. 3. Health Advisors and Emergency Medical Advisors have a period of mentoring following their initial training and also if any concerns are recognised during routine or requested audits. In order to pass the mentoring process, they have to demonstrate that they have passed all key competencies. This is achieved by a mentor witnessing the mentee undertake all of the required elements from within the mentoring pack to the required standard. The mentor will then sign off on the individual elements once competency is achieved. The handling of complex calls has been added to those core competencies and as such new Health Advisors and Emergency Medical Advisors will be required to demonstrate this as a competency moving forwards. In addition to the actions already undertaken, the following is planned: 4. A “shared learning” is an anonymised real case example circulated to all relevant staff to demonstrate an issue in practice and to reinforce theoretical learning. Experience has shown that real cases can be more powerful and thus are more readily retained than theory of a particular process or procedure. Our Head of Governance for 111 plans to publish a shared learning based on Hannah’s family’s contacts with the 111 service before the end of January 2022. It is for NHS Digital to address the issue of how NHS Pathways accommodates patients with underlying disabilities. 3 - The skill and experience of the clinical advisor The NHS Pathways licence contains a definition of a Clinician who may give clinical advice as part of the NHS Pathways system as follows: "Clinician" means either: (a) a registered nurse; or (b) a registered paramedic; or (c) any other personnel with an appropriate recognised clinical qualification as authorised and notified to End Users by the Authority from time to time, and which is selected by the End User to receive the necessary training to enable them to perform the role detailed in schedules 1 and 2; As (in most cases) it is SECAmb who employs the clinician, we remain responsible for setting criteria for employment by way of a Job Description, for setting standards of skill, experience and qualification for recruitment and for ensuring that clinicians are trained in the use of the NHS Pathways system. We also have a licence obligation to audit and manage the performance of the clinicians we employ. Governing bodies such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council set requirements for their registrants to demonstrate, on an annual basis, that their clinical practice is up to date. SECAmb require applicants for the Clinical Advisor role to have at least two years’ post qualification or relevant experience as part of the recruitment process. SECAmb shortlists candidates in line with a robust set of criteria. Once candidates have been shortlisted, they are invited to interview/assessment. This consists of the following: • Clinical Questions paper. These questions cover a range of conditions, complaints and treatments and is a pass/fail element. • Clinical Scenarios. The candidate has to pass two scenario type questions, which again are based on a variety of different conditions and symptoms. • Once the candidate passes the first two elements, they have to pass a competency-based interview. Once a candidate has been successful they must complete all the required training to be signed off as a Clinical Advisor. This training consists of the following: • NHSP and Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) course. This is a pass or fail course and is a national requirement. • Each candidate must complete the call handling module to ensure that they are competent in using the system. • Each candidate must complete ‘soft’ audits prior to being moved on to the next phase of training. • Each candidate must then complete a period of clinical mentoring. • Each candidate must complete five sign off audits before being signed off to work as a solo Clinical Supervisor. All staff using NHSP are then required to receive 3 to 5 audits a month. The number of required audits relate to which audit tier they are on. The tier a staff member is on is dependant on experience and also whether they are on any improvement plan. SECAmb does not specify a field of experience such as A&E or urgent care because the range of medical conditions and situations with which we deal on a daily basis is so wide. Experience in a wide range of disciplines in our clinical workforce in the 111 service is an advantage; a broad spectrum of experience in different clinical settings (e.g. cardiac, stroke, paediatrics, mental health) helps us to accommodate the extremely diverse needs of our patients. In autumn 2020, SECAmb entered into a contract to provide a Clinical Assessment Service (“CAS”). The CAS is a national framework whereby 111 providers are required to employ a range of various clinical skill sets to cater for various patient needs in a virtual environment. The CAS incorporates clinicians from a very wide range of disciplines including GPs, midwives, registered Mental Health nurses, Paediatric Nurses and others; the number of clinicians and range of disciplines is increasing on a monthly basis. The objective of the CAS in the longer term is to provide a system whereby patients are directed to the most appropriate service to accommodate their needs; that service may be provided by the SECAmb CAS virtually or by an onward care provider. This system aims to get patients the most appropriate help within the most appropriate time frame, with the patient only needing to make one phone call to 111. This all makes for a better patient journey as the service aims to meet their health care needs without them requiring to have multiple contacts with various services. As our complement of clinicians increases in both number and diversity, it is anticipated that the bespoke and specialist nature of the 111 service will increase accordingly. 4 & 5 – role and understanding of the 111 service; naming of Health Advisors As these are matters of national policy, SECAmb defers to NHS England. 6 – NHS Pathway for Abdominal Pain We defer to NHS Digital on this matter. I trust that this response provides assurance that SECAmb have promptly addressed the matters within our remit and have plans to further enhance our staff’s understanding of and compliance with our complex call procedure. If I can be of further assistance to you or to me. , please do not hesitate to contact Yours faithfully Chief Executive Officer South East Coast Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching South East Coast Ambulance Service 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.