Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2023

Tracey Rose

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2023-0387, written 17 Oct 2023. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report17 Oct 2023
Reference2023-0387
DeceasedTracey Rose
CoronerPaul Marks
Coroner areaEast Riding and Hull
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.

ANNEX A 

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) 

NOTE: This form is to be used after an inquest. 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:  

1. 

, Chief Medical Officer, Hull & East Yorkshire, NHS Trust 

1 

CORONER 

I am Professor Paul Marks, Senior Coroner, for the Coroner Area of City of Kingston 
Upon Hull and the County of the East Riding of Yorkshire. 

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 February 2023 I commenced an investigation into the death of Tracey Elizabeth 
Rose, aged 52 years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 2nd 
October 2023. The conclusion of the inquest was: ACCIDENT 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

These are set out in my summary and findings of facts which are attached. 

Tracey Elizabeth Rose suffered an injury on 2nd January 2023 resulting in a fracture of 
the right tibial plateau. This was treated by open reduction and internal fixation on 4th 
January 2023. She was at higher risk of thromboembolic disease due to obesity and 
systemic lupus erythematosus and at discharge was recommended to have a course of 
six weeks dalteparin. Due to a dispensing issue, she missed up to three doses. She was 
readmitted to Hull Royal Infirmary on 25th January with shortness of breath and 
dizziness. She was suspected of having a pulmonary embolism which was subsequently 
confirmed, but despite embolectomy using interventional radiological techniques in 
which a large amount of thrombus was retrieved, her heart did not restart and she died 
on 25th January 2023.  

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 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)  This woman was discharged home without her prescription of dalteparin being 
dispensed, also her last dose whilst in hospital may not have been given. 
Evidence was heard that missing up to three doses of this anticoagulant, in 
someone with increased risk factors for thromboembolic disease, may have 
significantly contributed to her developing a pulmonary embolism.  

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and your 
organisation has the power to take such action by ensuring no doses are missed and 
that patients who have been prescribed such medication leave hospital with the 
appropriate supply. 

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by Tuesday, 12th of December 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: 

• 

, Next of Kin  

I am also sending a copy to NHS England and equivalent organisations in the other 
countries of the United Kingdom. 

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 

17th  October 2023                                        

2

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 Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
t.•1:kj 

Northern Lincolnshire 
and Goole 
NHS Foundation Trust 

Hull Royal Infirmary 
Anlaby Road 
Hull 
HU3 2JZ 

r.•1:kj 

Hull University 
Teaching  Hospitals 
NHS Trust 

Friday 22 December 2023 

Private and Confidential 
Professor Paul Marks 
HM Senior Coroner for East Riding of Yorkshire and Hull 
The Coroner's Court and Offices 
The Guildhall 
Alfred  Gelder Street 
Hull 
HU1  2AA 

Dear Professor Marks, 

Re:  Death of Tracey Elizabeth  Rose - Response to Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future 
Deaths 

I write in  response to the Regulation 28  Report to Prevent Future Deaths, dated and received on 
the 17th  October 2023, issued as a result of the concluded inquest into the death of Ms Tracey 
Elizabeth Rose. 

I would  like to take this opportunity to express my sincerest condolences to the family of Ms Rose 
for their loss. 

Upon conclusion of the inquest the following concerns were raised: 

•  Ms Rose was discharged home without her prescription of Dalteparin being dispensed, also her 
last dose whilst in  hospital may not have been given.  Evidence was heard that missing up to 
three doses of this anticoagulant, in someone with  increased  risk factors for thromboembolic 
disease,  may have significantly contributed to her developing a pulmonary embolism. 

I would  like to confirm that following receipt of your Regulation 28 correspondence, the Trust has 
investigated the concerns you  raised and we are able to provide a response and detail the actions 
we have taken. 

Prescribing and Dispensing of Dalteparin 
As established at inquest, Ms Rose was prescribed  Dalteparin via injection once daily immediately 
following surgery for open reduction and internal fixation of a right tibial fracture on 4th  January 
2023. This is a standard VTE prophylaxis used widely for patients following this type of surgery. 

Following discussion with the Trust Pharmacy Team  and review of the Trust's electronic 
prescribing system, we can confirm that on  19th  January 2023 at 09:42am, a Foundation Year 2 
(FY2) doctor on the ward where Ms Rose was an  inpatient raised a prescription for her. This 
prescription was requested for Ms Rose in anticipation of her planned discharge on 20th  January 
and included  Dabigatran, a VTE prophylaxis.  It is standard practice for patient's receiving 
Dalteparin injection whilst an inpatient to be switched to Dabigatran when discharged from the 
hospital. This is because Dabigatran takes the form of a capsule that can be taken orally and 

 
 
 therefore does not require the patient to self-inject or have a third-party to inject them when they 
are at home. 

The Trust pharmacy records indicate that when the FY2 doctor processed the prescription for 
Dabigatran, the electronic prescribing system identified that Ms Rose was already taking 
ciclosporin - brand  name Neoral - a medication which was known to have a strong adverse 
interaction with  Dabigatran. The Trust electronic prescribing system rates any identified adverse 
reactions between medications on a scale of 1 to 4 stars - 4 stars being the most severe adverse 
interaction. The adverse reaction between ciclosporin and Dabigatrin is rated at 4 stars. When the 
FY2 doctor processed the prescription the below alert message would have appeared informing 
them of the adverse interaction: 

Drug details  Conflicts@ j Additional details !Technical validation details! 
1-------------------

l  Details 

Prescriber... 

Type 

Drug lnter,,ctlon 

The existing drug NEORAL
Interacts with prescribed drug 

Required for patient

•  High * * *   dablgatran etexllate. 

Manufacturer advises avoid 

* 

1 Acknowled...  1 Authoriser reason 

l  Clinical verifier,

At this time the electronic prescribing system required the prescribing clinician to tick a box which 
confirmed that they had  noted the alert but wished to override and proceed with the prescription. 
Although the prescribing system can  raise alerts about medications,  ultimate decisions around 
their prescription and  consideration of risk rest with the treating clinicians. The prescription was 
processed by the Trust pharmacy and dispensed to the ward at 15:43 on  19 January 2023 in 
advance of Ms Rose's planned discharge the following day. 

Although not recorded in  the patient notes, it appears from the pharmacy records that the above 
issue was identified by one of the treating clinicians, as part of the safety check, prior to  Ms  Rose's 
discharge on 20 January 2023 and a new prescription was requested  replacing the Dabigatran 
with Dalteparin. 

Unfortunately, although this prescription was processed and dispensed in  a timely manner by the 
Pharmacy team, it was not ready before Ms Rose had  left the ward, and Ms  Rose did not wish to 
wait for it. According to the Trust prescribing system, the prescription was issued at 17:43 on 20 
January 2023. The pharmacy at Castle Hill Hospital closes at 18:00, therefore the Dalteparin was 
not dispensed and collected from the pharmacy until the following day at 13:12. 

Circumstances around Ms Rose's discharge on  20 January 2023 

Following discussion with the Ward Sister and Matron for Ward 9 at Castle Hill Hospital and the 
nursing staff involved we have established that a dose of Dalteparin was administered to Ms Rose 
shortly before discharge on 20 January 2023. Unfortunately, the administering nurse did not record 
the dose in the medication  record and  has advised that the ward extremely busy as it was around 
the time that the patients were being given their evening meal. The patient transport had also 
arrived to take Ms Rose home and she was keen to leave.  The transport for Ms Rose on 20 
January had been organised on  17 January, this was because a risk assessment had to be 
undertaken of Ms Rose's home to ensure it was a safe place to discharge her, and Ms Rose was 
very keen to leave the hospital. The nurse has explained that as a result she felt pressured to get 
Ms Rose ready for discharge and subsequently failed to record the administered dose of 
Dalteparin. 

 Due to Ms Rose receiving a dose of Dalteparin on the ward  prior to discharge on 20 January 2023, 
it appears that the nursing staff were assured that Ms Rose could wait until the following day to 
receive the Dalteparin when her next dose was due; unfortunately, this did  not happen.  The 
Trust's prescribing system shows the ward  incorrectly returned  Ms Rose's  Dalteparin to the 
pharmacy on 21  January 2023, the note on the system states that the prescription was 'no longer 
being needed'.  We were unable to establish who returned the prescription to pharmacy on 
21  January 2023,  as we were able to confirm that the need to the prescription to be sent to Ms 
Rose via taxi was included in  the nursing handover. 

It is usual practice in these circumstances for medication to be sent to the patient at home via taxi 
and we sincerely apologise to Ms Rose's family that this did not happen on this occasion. 

Changes Implemented by the Trust since the death of Ms Rose 
In  May 2023, changes were made to the adverse interaction alerts issued by the Trust's electronic 
prescribing system.  In  circumstances where a serious potential adverse reaction is identified, the 
system now requires prescribing clinicians to type an explanation as to why they are overriding an 
alert, rather than simply ticking a box. This change is intended to make our clinicians pause and 
further consider the alert before deciding whether to override it. 

The circumstance regarding Ms Rose's prescription and the findings of the investigations have 
also been brought to the Trust's VTE Steering Group for learning to be shared. 

I like to sincerely apologise that this information was not made available to you at the time of the 
inquest.  I hope that this letter provides both you and Ms Rose's family with assurance that the 
Trust has taken seriously the matter of concerns you  raised  in  your report.

Related reports

Other reports by Paul Marks

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.