Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2023

Christine Nakafeero

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2023-0270, written 24 Jul 2023. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report24 Jul 2023
Reference2023-0270
DeceasedChristine Nakafeero
CoronerGraeme Irvine
Coroner areaEast London
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) 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.

MR G IRVINE 
SENIOR CORONER 

EAST LONDON 

East London Coroner's Court, 124 Queens Road Walthamstow, E17 8QP 

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

Trust 

1. 

2. 

, Chief Executive Officer, Barts Health NHS Foundation 

, National Medical Director, NHS England 

3.  Rt Hon Steve Barclay MP, Secretary of State for Health & Social Care  

1 

CORONER 

I am Graeme Irvine, senior coroner, for the coroner area of East London 

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. 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5/paragraph/7 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/part/7/made 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 22nd June 2022 this Court commenced an investigation into the death of Christine 
Nakafeero, age 56 years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest between 
20th and 21st July 2023. The court returned a narrative conclusion. 

“Christine  Goodfriday  Nakafeero  died  at  home  on  21st  June  2022  due  to  a  pulmonary 
embolism  caused  by  a  deep  vein  thrombosis  ("DVT").  The  DVT  was  made  more  likely 
by: a medical condition, uterine fibroids and the treatment for that condition, tranexamic 
acid. 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 In  2019  Ms  Nakafeero  was  referred  to  the  gynaecology  clinic  with  a  recommendation 
that  she  underwent  a  hysterectomy  to  effectively  treat  her  uterine  fibroids.  Due  to  a 
breakdown of communication between Ms Nakafeero and the Trust, the surgery was not 
undertaken.  Had  the  surgery  taken  place,  Ms  Nakafeero  would  probably  not  have 
developed a pulmonary embolism in June 2022.” 

Ms Nakafeero’s medical cause of death was determined as: 

1a Pulmonary Emboli; 1b Deep Vein Thrombosis; II Uterine Fibroids 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Christine Goodfriday Nakafeero was found unresponsive at home on the evening of 21st 
June 2022. Despite the best efforts of her family and emergency services she was 
declared deceased that evening. 

Her death was caused by a pulmonary embolism, in turn caused by a deep vein 
thrombosis. 

Earlier that day Ms Nakafeero had been discharged from hospital having presented with 
symptoms of menorrhagia and associated pain and anaemia on 19th June 2022. 

Whilst an inpatient, Ms Nakafeero was assessed for risk of venous-thrombo-embolism 
(“VTE”) risk utilising the Trust’s VTE policy, she was categorised as having zero risk of 
thrombo-embolism. 

Ms Nakafeero had been diagnosed with uterine fibroids since 2019 and had been 
prescribed tranexamic acid and pain relief to control the symptoms.  

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 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.  Ms Nakafeero was assessed at a Gynae-oncology clinic in early 2019. The 
patient was diagnosed as not suffering from any form of cancer and was 
therefore referred on to the “benign” gynaecology team.  

Ms Nakafeero was advised that it was likely that the most effective treatment for 
her condition was a hysterectomy. It was expected that the likely wait for this 
treatment would be 6 months. 

Ms Nakafeero was not allocated an appointment and therefore had not received 
the necessary surgery by the time of her death in June 2022. Had the surgery 
been undertaken it is probable that she would not have developed a pulmonary 
embolism. 

Although the trust has investigated these circumstances and implemented 
change, no clear explanation could be offered for why the deceased slipped out 
of this care pathway. I am not satisfied that the risk of re-occurrence has been 
properly addressed. 

2.  The clinicians treating Ms Nakafeero assessed her VTE risk utilising an 
established algorithm based on national guidance. The assessment was 
undertaken appropriately but it failed to identify two risk factors which made the 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 formation of a DVT more likely, namely, large uterine fibroids and the use of 
tranexamic acid. I have concerns that the omission of these factors in the 
assessment criteria limited the effectiveness of the risk assessment. 

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 Monday 18th September 2023 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 the family of Ms Nakafeero. I have also sent it to the local Director of Public 
Health who may find it useful or of interest. 

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 other 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. 

9 

 24/07/2023        

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 Barts Health NHS Trust 1 (PDF)
Trust Executive Office 
Ground Floor 
Pathology and Pharmacy Building 
The Royal London Hospital 
80 Newark Street 
London E1 2ES 

Group Chief Medical Officer 

14 September 2023 

Mr Graeme Irvine 
Area Coroner – East London 
Walthamstow Coroner’s Court 
Queen’s Road 
London 
E17 8QP 

Dear Mr Irvine 

Re:  Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths 

I write regarding your letter of regarding your concerns relating to the death of Christine Nakafeero at 
Newham University Hospital.  I hope this letter will provide assurance to you of the steps that we are 
taking to address the concerns you have outlined.  I will respond to these concerns in turn. 

1. Patients lost to follow-up on the Gynaecology pathway 

We are implementing a fully electronic outpatient outcome system using outpatient organiser on our 
Cerner millennium system. This provides real time outcoming within clinics, and an electronic audit 
trail to track the patient along the pathway. 
Alongside the use of electronic outcome forms, the Trust is rolling out LUNA, a digital monitoring tool 
for patient tracking lists which will replace our current electronic waiting list tool at the end of 
September 2023. LUNA has the ability to pick up errors allowing staff to make corrections. It  has an 
AI tool that reviews letters for key text which can indicate where incorrect discharge is matched with 
a letter stating the patient should be seen again. Therefore, this can be  corrected, and a follow up 
appointment sent to the patient . 

2.  Limitations of the VTE risk assessment 

You raised concerns that the use of tranexamic acid and the presence of pelvic fibroids may have 
have limited the national risk assessment tool for prevention of venous thromboembolism although 
the national tool was used correctly. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The Trust has discussed this matter at the Venous Thromboembolism Prevention Committee and 
reviewed the available published evidence regarding the relative risk of these two factors and any 
other available guidance. Current evidence of relative risk is very limited and subject to debate 
nationally and there are no specific College or National guidelines available dealing with these 
specific topics. 

In addition, the Trust has sought advice from 
Thrombosis and Haemostasis at Kings College Hospital and Director of the National VTE Exemplar 
Centres Network in England as well as previously Clinical Lead for the National VTE Prevention 
Programme. The Trust has been advised that the use of the tool was appropriate and at this time 
there is not enough evidence to adapt or change this. In addition, in a  patient who was experiencing 
recurrent heavy bleeding the use of enoxaparin was not indicated and there was no indication for 
anti-embolic stockings. 
The Trust’s VTE committee will continue to monitor the information received from national bodies as 
part of the overarching vigilance regarding preventable venous thromboembolism. 

 who is Professor of 

Thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention. I trust that you are assured that I have 
taken them seriously and that the hospital has investigated them appropriately and is taking 
appropriate action.  Please let me know if you require clarity on any of the points above. 

Yours sincerely 

Chief Medical Officer 

Barts Health NHS Trust
Response from Department of Health and Social Care (PDF)
From Maria Caulfield MP   
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for  
Mental Health and Women's Health Strategy   
Department of Health & Social Care   

39 Victoria Street   
London   
SW1H 0EU   

Mr Graeme Irvine    

Senior Coroner East London   

East London Coroner's Court   

124 Queens Road Walthamstow   
E17 8QP    

13 May 2024  

Dear Mr Irvine,     

Thank you for the Regulation 28 (Preventing Future Deaths) report of 24th July 2023 in 
relation to the death of Christine Nakafeero. I am replying as Minister with responsibility for 
patient safety.    

Please accept my sincere apologies for the delay in responding to this matter. I would like to 
assure you that the Department is mindful of the statutory responsibilities in relation to PFD 
reports and we are prioritising responses as a matter of urgency.    

I would like to begin by saying how saddened I was to read about the circumstances of Ms 
Nakafeero’s death and would like to offer my sincere condolences to her family and loved 
ones. It is vital that we learn from incidents where we can to improve NHS care.    

I have noted the concerns raised in your report. The first relates to the Trust’s failure to 
allocate an appointment for Ms Nakafeero to undergo a hysterectomy, coupled with the 
absence of a clear explanation as to why she slipped out of this care pathway. You also 

   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
  
  
   
   
    
    
   
    
   
 expressed concern that Ms Nakafeero’s venous-thrombo-embolism (VTE) risk was 
assessed by utilising an established algorithm based on national guidance but that despite 
this being done appropriately, it failed to identify two risk factors which made the formation 
of a deep vein thrombosis more likely.    

I understand that the Care Quality Commission (CQC) engaged with Barts Health NHS 
Trust following Ms Nakafeero death, to understand what actions it was taking to address 
your concerns. The Trust explained that it was in the process of improving how it monitors 
outpatient outcomes and how it tracks patients along the pathway. To facilitate this, the 
Trust confirmed that it was implementing an improved digital monitoring tool for patient 
tracking lists to replace its electronic waiting list tool. I understand that CQC is monitoring 
the impact of this implementation and how the Trust assures itself that it is effectively 
monitoring all patients across care pathways.    

The Trust also explained to CQC that it was seeking expert advice from Professor Roopen 
Arya, Professor of Thrombosis and Haemostasis at King’s College Hospital and Director of 
the National VTE Exemplar Centres Network in England. Professor Arya advised the Trust 
that the use of the tool to assess VTE risk and determine intervention was appropriate and 
that at that time there was insufficient evidence to adapt or change this. I am aware that the 
Trust is also continuing to monitor the information it received from national bodies that 
informed how it implements best practice on prevention of VTE.    

I would like to assure you that ensuring patients are safe is a priority for this Government. 
We have taken significant action over the last decade to advance patient safety and the 
response to harm in the NHS and, with our system partners, will continue to do all we can 
to stop harmful events from ever happening.    

Thank you again for bringing your concerns to my attention.      

Yours sincerely,   

MARIA CAULFIELD

Related reports

Other reports by Graeme Irvine

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.