Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2023

Zulfiqar Hussain

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2023-0476, written 24 Nov 2023. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report24 Nov 2023
Reference2023-0476
DeceasedZulfiqar Hussain
CoronerJulie Mitchell
Coroner areaManchester North
CategoryAlcohol, drug and medication related deaths · Mental Health related deaths · Other 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.

REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS (1) 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1. 

 & Partners, Croft Shifa Health Centre, Bellfield Road, ROCHDALE  

1 

CORONER 

I am Julie Mitchell, Assistant Coroner for the Coroner area of Manchester North 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009 and Regulations 28 
and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On  18  July  2023  an  investigation  into  the  death  of  Zulfiqar  HUSSAIN  was  commenced.  The  investigation 
concluded at the end of the inquest on 12 October 2023. The conclusion of the inquest was drug related and 
the cause of death was: 

1a   Combined drug toxicity 

1b   - 

1c   - 

 II  Bronchopneumonia  

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF DEATH 

Zulfiqar Hussain was 48 years old at the time of his death. He suffered with mental health issues and was 
receiving mental health care from the community mental health team. He was also a chronic illicit substance 
user and had received regular support from Turning Point. 

On 2 April 2023, the deceased was found at his home address having died from combined drug toxicity leading 
to  significant  respiratory  depression,  which  was  compounded  by  the  presence  of  pneumonia.  It  was  not 
possible,  on  the  evidence  available,  to  determine  whether  the  deceased  had  ingested  the  drugs  with  the 
intention of ending his life. 

During the course of the inquest, the Court heard evidence about correspondence sent to the GP practice by 
Turning  Point  and  the  Mental  Health  Team.  An  adverse  medication  marker  should  have  been  prominently 
placed  on  the  deceased’s  electronic  medical  records  as  a  result  of  correspondence  from  Turning  Point. 
However, this was not done. 

There were at least 2 occasions when correspondence from the mental health team should have prompted a 
clinical review by a clinician. These did not take place and the Court heard that this was most likely because 
the correspondence was filed by administration staff without it having been seen by a clinician.  

Whilst the evidence does not reach the requisite standard to show that the deceased’s death would have been 
averted  had  correspondence  been  reviewed  by  clinicians  at  the  GP  practice,  it  meant  that  opportunities  to 
provide the deceased with support and care and to foster his engagement with health services were missed. 

It is regrettable that  this Court has  previously issued  a Regulation 28 report to your practice on the  lack of 
robust processes to ensure clinician review of correspondence and, despite assurances, the situation in which 
correspondence is filed by administration staff without any clinician review pertains (see Regulation 28 report 
dated 23 December 2021).  

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)  As previously raised in Report to Prevent Future Deaths dated 23 December 2021, incoming 

correspondence to the GP practice continues to be dealt with by administrative staff who decide 
whether or not it is placed before a GP. The concern is that there is no robust system in place to 
ensure that communication to the surgery which may require action to be taken by medical staff is 
brought to their attention. 

(2)  Adverse medication markers are not being placed on computerised medical records and this creates 

the risk that contraindicated medications may be inadvertently prescribed. 

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe each of you respectively 
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  Friday  19 
January 2024. I, the Assistant 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:- 

•  The family of the Deceased 
•  Turning Point 
•  The Care Quality Commission 
•  The GM Integrated Care Partnership  

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 from. 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. 

- 

Date:          24.11.23                   Signed:

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 The Croft Shifa Health Centre (PDF)
THE CROFT SH/FA HEALTH CENTRE 
BELFIELD ROAD, ROCHDALE, LANCS. OL16 2UP 

Regulation 28  Report - Response 

12th  December 2023 

Re:  Death  of Zulfiqar Hussain 

Dear Coroner Mitchell 

I would  like to extend  my sincere condolences to the family of the deceased. I also 
offer my apologies to yourself for the delay in  responding to the  initial  informal 
request for information . 

With  reference to the above and  your concern  regarding  document workflow and 
adverse medication markers placed  in  medical  records. 

1.  As  previously raised  in  report to prevent future death dated 23 December 

2021 , incoming  correspondence to the GP practice continues to  be  dealt with 
by  administrative staff who decide whether or not it is  placed  before a GP. 
The concern is that there  is  no  robust system  in  place to ensure that 
communication to the surgery which  may require action to  be taken by 
medical staff is  brought to  their attention. 

Our document management was  reviewed  in  November 2021  in  response to a 
Regulation  28  Report issued  by the coroner. We had a practice meeting  and 
discussed the process of filing  Did  Not Attend notifications that were in  place for 
secondary care services as well  as  screening services and '2  week wait'  suspected 
cancer referrals.  We agreed that we would  amend the  procedure for document 
management to expand the  list to  include the below mentioned specialities that would 
be sent to GP's,  as a result of this  incident.  Please see attached Significant Event 
Analysis  report. 

We  have two designated members of staff who  are  responsible for document 
management within the practice. The GP's discussed and  informed  staff that the 
below noted  patients are  'high  risk'.  The  Document Management Policy was  updated 
to  reflect the  changes. 

2 Week Wait (Suspected Cancer)  referrals. 
Learning  Disabilities 
Mental  Health/Depression (all  patients) 
Safeguarding  notifications 
Addiction 
Patients  on  Gold Standard Framework - patients who are  on 'end  of life pathway' . 

 
 
 
 
 Any correspondence for patients above is to work flowed to the GP the letter is 
addressed to.  If the matter is  urgent,  a medication change  or a notification  of patient's 
personal circumstance (safeguarding/abuse) this is  forwarded to the GP on  call. 

In this case the last letter received from  Turning  Point,  Rochdale & Oldham Active 
Recovery service,  was dated 22/3/2023.  The service had a face-to-face meeting with 
Mr Hussain  on  2/2/23 with  his  Recovery support worker present at the consultation . 
Unfortunately,  I can  only send screen  shots of the  audit trail of this  letter as the 
document management system shows the history  of the document workflow but does 
not allow this to  be  printed together with the document in  view,  I have therefore, 
attached screen shots to  highlight that the letter was sent to the GP for perusal.  I 
apologise for the fact that,  at the inquest, I could  not recall  that the letter had been 
forwarded to me,  as  per protocol;  I had  not anticipated questions regarding this. 

2.  Adverse medication markers are  not being  placed  on  computerised medical 
records and this creates the risk that contraindicated medications may be 
inadvertently prescribed . 

We conducted an  audit on  Mr Hussain's medical records which showed that an  alert 
was  added to the records  on  10/11/2020 alerting any clinician  adding  medication that 
may have potential misuse (including  not to add benzodiazepines , opiates and 
gabapentin/pregabalin) and  listing  medication that could  have an  interaction with 
methadone. I attach an  audit trail  of this. 

This  alert message appears as the patient record is  accessed . However, to see 
further information within the record,  this messaged must be closed to  proceed 
further into the record.  On the day of the inquest, I must have closed the  alert, in 
order to  proceed,  therefore the message does not reappear unless a medication is to 
be  added which would again trigger the alert to appear.  This is the reason that,  when 
questioned,  it was not showing when you  specifically asked about medication alert. I 
offer my apologies for this  confusion  on  my part. 

I hope that the above  provides reassurances that the previous Regulation  28 was 
actioned , and the changes  made have been effective. 

Please accept my apologies again that this evidence was  not provided  at the inquest. 
I will  be  happy to  provide further information,  if asked to do so . 

Yours sincerely 

On  behalf of my Partners who  have reviewed  and agreed  on  the word ing  of this 
response.

Related reports

More reports categorised “Alcohol, drug and medication related deaths”

See all →

Track Alcohol, drug and medication related deaths

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Alcohol, drug and medication 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.