Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0261, written 14 May 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 14 May 2024 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2024-0261 |
| Deceased | Margaret Clement |
| Coroner | Christopher Long |
| Coroner area | Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
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 FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 1. , Chief Executive East Lancashire Teaching Hospitals 1 CORONER I am Mr Christopher Long, Area Coroner for the coroner area of Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen 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 23 June 2022 I commenced an investigation into the death of Margaret Clement (92 years old). The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 8 May 2024. The conclusion of the inquest was: Margaret CLEMENT died on 15 June 2022 at Royal Blackburn Hospital, Blackburn. Following a fall, Mrs CLEMENT was admitted to hospital where a fractured neck of femur was diagnosed and operated upon on 23 May 2023. Mrs CLEMENT was prescribed anticoagulation following the operation to reduce the risk of clotting. She was discharged to Pendle Community hospital for rehabilitation on 10 June 2022. She had suspected melaena in the evening on 12 June 2022. She then developed significant rectal bleeding in the morning of 14 June 2022 and was admitted to Royal Blackburn Hospital following vomiting blood later in the evening. An upper gastrointestinal bleed was then diagnosed which led to a cerebrovascular accident from which she did not recover 4 CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Please see box 3 above. 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) Evidence was heard that nursing records on Reedyford ward were inadequate in a number of respects including recording the wrong medication, requesting a medical review for the wrong patient and not recording when an urgent review was needed in the doctor's task book (2)Evidence was heard that nursing handovers were inadequate and did not ensure appropriate risks were managed and prioritised (3)Evidence was heard that doctors on the ward did not effectively prioritise work by 1 reviewing the task book in order to identify more urgent tasks (4)Nursing staff failed to request medical review verbally were it was appropriate to do so, relying on a task book. (5) Nursing staff failed to seek urgent clinical assistance when presented with a significant per rectum bleed (6) Inadequate measures have been taken to assess compliance with procedural changes and expectations that have been set following the Trust investigation into this matter 6 ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and 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 Wednesday 10 July 2024. 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: Margaret Clement's family. 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 14 May 2024 2
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.
Enquiries to:
Telephone No:
Ext:
Email
9th July 2024
Michelle Connolly
Royal Blackburn Teaching Hospital
82801
Trust Headquarters
Haslingden Road
Blackburn
BB2 3HH
Mr Christopher Long
HM Area Coroner
Lancashire and Blackburn with Darwen
2 Faraday Drive
Preston
PR2 9NB
Dear Mr Long
Regulation 28 Report – Response by East Lancashire NHS Trust
Inquest relating to the death of Margaret Clement
This letter comprises the formal response of East Lancashire Hospitals NHS Trust (“the Trust”)
pursuant to section 7(2) to Schedule 5 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and Regulation 29
Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013, to the issues raised in the Regulation 28 Report to
Prevent Future Deaths, dated 14 May 2024, made following the inquest into the death of
Margaret Clement, which concluded on 8 May 2024.
I would like to start the response by offering our sincere condolences to Margaret’s family for
their loss. The Trust fully accepts the findings of HM Coroner and are truly sorry that Margaret
did not receive the treatment and care we would expect her to receive.
The Prevention of Future Deaths report identifies a number of areas of concern, and I will
address these in this response, with details of the actions we have undertaken and those that
we plan to undertake in the near future, along with details of the improvements made to date.
Matters of Concern
(1) Evidence was heard that nursing records on Reedyford ward were inadequate in a
number of respects including recording the wrong medication, requesting a medical
review for the wrong patient and not recording when an urgent review was needed in
the doctor’s task book.
Response
The Trust undertook a Patient Safety Incident Investigation (PSII) into the treatment and care
provided to Margaret during her admission to Royal Blackburn Hospital in May and June 2022.
The investigation found a reliance on written documentation to escalate and communicate
Margaret’s condition by staff at Reedyford ward, and that nurses at Reedyford Ward did not
have an opportunity to escalate to a doctor in person.
Since the conclusion of the inquest the Trust has undertaken a significant amount of work on
Reedyford ward to ensure these concerns have been addressed.
Firstly, since 21 June 2024, the doctors’ tasks book on Reedyford has been removed. I can
confirm that now all doctors’ tasks (non-urgent) are requested via the Whiteboard on Cerner
(the Trust’s Clinical Electronic Record system) during core hours. Urgent actions are
communicated verbally and escalated directly to medical staff during core hours and to the
Acute Care Team out of hours.
Secondly, the SOP091 Pendle Community Hospital Ward Escalation Plan which was referred to
at the inquest, includes a nurse escalation process, outlines the Early Warning Score, the
frequency of observations and an escalation protocol, and has been printed/laminated and
attached to the clinical observation equipment, so it is visibly available on the ward. A hard copy
of the SOP is also available on the ward and all staff are aware of the escalation pathway which
contains the staged process, outlining what action needs to be taken and by when. I have
received assurance from the Ward Manager that all staff are now compliant with the awareness
and training of the nurse escalation process on the ward.
I can also confirm that all medications are now administered and updated via Cerner. All
Reedyford Ward computers have scanners attached to them to administer medications and
these are now being used by the Registered Nurses during the medicine rounds. To provide
assurance that this action is being taken, the use of wrist bands and the administration of
correct medication will be routinely monitored through senior nurse observations and reported
back to the Division if any concerns are identified. I am pleased to advise that following an audit
undertaken on 24 June 2024 no concerning medication incidents were identified and we will
continue to monitor this through the appropriate governance forums, including the Trust’s
Quality and Safety Committee.
In addition to the above, the doctors’ guidance documents have been updated to include these
updated processes so that clinicians on the ward are familiar with the updated ways of working.
(2) Evidence was heard that nursing handovers were inadequate and did not ensure
appropriate risks were managed and prioritised.
Response
During the inquest I am aware that evidence was heard that the signs of gastrointestinal
bleeding, and plans made to manage Margaret’s condition, had not been verbally handed over
between nursing staff on Reedyford Ward.
Since the conclusion of the inquest work has been undertaken to ensure that there is a
standardised approach for the measurement and management, and communication, of clinical
risks between shifts.
As indicated above, doctors task books are no longer in use and all tasks are updated,
monitored and completed on Cerner which all staff have access to. Nursing and Medical staff
are responsible for ensuring these tasks have been completed and nurses are embedding the
use of the Patient e-Obs at handover which provides an overview of the clinical observations
over a period rather than the last set of observations taken. This enables trends in clinical
observations to be identified in a timely manner and I have received assurance from
observation of practice by Senior Nurses that this is now happening.
(3) Evidence was heard that doctors on the ward did not effectively prioritise work by
reviewing the task book in order to identify more urgent tasks.
Response
The Trust’s investigation found that the task book entry relating to Margaret’s condition, and the
signs of gastrointestinal bleeding, were not reviewed by a doctor whilst at Reedyford ward.
Therefore, as indicated above, in order to address this concern, the task books have been
removed from the wards at Pendle Community Hospital.
There is now a daily MDT (multidisciplinary team meeting) and a twice daily planned handover
from the medical team to the Acute Care Team (ACT) to ensure seamless handovers to ensure
that any patients who are of concern are identified. The ACT are highly experienced with the skills
needed to provide timely interventions to stabilise patients whose clinical condition deteriorates
unexpectedly. This level of advanced clinical decision making and problem solving enables a more
comprehensive and encompassing package of care and increases support for the workload of the
medical teams, particularly if needed in the out of hours period. All doctors’ tasks (non-urgent) are
requested via the Whiteboard on Cerner during core hours. Urgent actions are now
communicated verbally and escalated directly to medical staff during core hours and to the
Acute Care Team out of hours.
In order to provide assurance around the new process a review of all incidents and medication
errors has been undertaken which I am pleased to confirm has not identified any concerns.
(4) Nursing staff failed to request medical review verbally where it was appropriate to do
so, relying on a task book.
Response
With regards to the above concern, I am aware that nursing staff on the ward relied heavily on
the doctor’s task book to escalate actions. In addition to the removal of the task books, nursing
staff now accompany the doctors on their ward rounds and make use of the daily MDT to
escalate concerns and immediate actions where necessary.
A review of this new MDT process was undertaken on 17 June 2024 which confirmed that all
notes and actions are now being documented in Cerner, which includes actions for the medical,
nursing and therapy teams.
The SOP046 MDT will be updated to reflect the requirement that both medical and nursing staff
check that the doctor’s tasks have been completed before they leave the ward. An audit of this
SOP has been undertaken and was presented at the Clinical Effectiveness Group in July 2024,
which identified recommendations. These have been transferred to a SMART action plan which
will be monitored by the Clinical Audit team within the Trust.
(5) Nursing staff failed to seek urgent clinical assistance when presented with a
significant per rectum bleed.
Response
I am aware that as part of the Trust’s investigation it was identified that staff failed to escalate
Margaret’s condition when it was deteriorating. Therefore, as a Trust we needed to ensure that
there was a clear process in place for recognition and escalation of deteriorating patients,
particularly in our community hospital.
Firstly, the Trust has arranged simulation training for all staff on the community wards.
The staff are presented with a history of the patient and are asked to detail how they would
assess that individual; this is repeated a number of times looking at the appropriate and most
effective ways to identify any concerns or deteriorations in a patient. The staff are expected to
complete full assessments of clinical observations, a physical examination of the patient,
discuss handover and who they would escalate to. Detailed documentation is also discussed,
including Incident reporting and the importance of accurate timely documentation.
Another element of training is a practical simulation-based assessment, which includes an
assessment of patients with varying medical complaints, each training session also simulates a
patient with a GI bleed, with a history similar to that of Margaret.
Secondly as indicated above, the SOP091 Pendle Community Hospital Ward Escalation Plan
which includes a nurse escalation process, including the frequency of observations and an
escalation protocol is now visibly available on the ward and all staff are aware of the Plan which
contains the staged process, outlining what action needs to be taken and by when.
(6) Inadequate measures have been taken to assess compliance with procedural
changes and expectations that have been set following the Trust investigation into
this matter.
Response
Since the conclusion of Margaret’s inquest, the Trust has updated its central process around
monitoring of actions by adding assurance regarding completion of action plans to the PSG
[Patient Safety Group] TOR (Terms of Reference) and agenda and all divisions have been
informed that they must ensure that they have PSII action plans assurance monitoring included
within the governance meetings. On agreement of all actions being completed, evidence will
then be uploaded on the Trusts Incident Management System DATIX.
To support the change to PSG agenda and TOR a new divisional report template has been
designed and approved. The report includes a section on PSII action plans, and these will be
governed by the Corporate PSG. Any delays or issues with actions plans not being completed
within timescales will be escalated within the report to PSG for discussion and support.
I hope that I have provided reassurances around the steps that we have taken to address the
issues of concern contained within your report. I would like to assure you that the Trust takes
your concerns extremely seriously, and, as a learning organisation, constantly strives to improve
the clinical services it delivers to patients.
Our thoughts remain with Margaret’s family.
Yours sincerely,
Chief Executive Officer
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.