William Stockil

Ms Joanne Andrews 
Area Coroner for West Sussex,  
Brighton and Hove 
Record Office 
Orchard Street 
Chichester 
PO19 1DD 

National Medical Director  
NHS England  
Wellington House 
133-155 Waterloo Road  
London 
SE1 8UG 

8 July 2024 

Dear Coroner, 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – William Richard Stockil 
who died on 6 September 2022  

Thank you for your Report to Prevent Future Deaths (hereafter “Report”) dated 29 April 
2024  concerning  the  death  of  William  Richard  Stockil  on  6  September  2022.  In 
advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like to 
express my deep condolences to William’s family and loved ones. NHS England are 
keen to assure the family and the  coroner that the concerns raised about  William’s 
care have been listened to and reflected upon.   

I am grateful for the further time granted to response to your Report, and I apologise 
for any anguish this delay may have caused to William’s family or friends. I realise that 
responses to Coroner Reports can form part of the important process of family and 
friends coming to terms with what has happened to their loved ones and appreciate 
this will have been an incredibly difficult time for them.  

Your Report raised concerns over the electronic prescription system (EPS) provided 
by Oracle Corporation UK Limited (formerly Cerner Limited), and raised that there was 
a  risk  that  the  set-up  of  the  alerting  system  now  used  by  the  Royal  Surrey  NHS 
Foundation  Trust  (RSFT)  (following  the  circumstances  of  William’s  death)  will  not 
operate to draw attention to the need for a prescription review before the medication 
ceases if no prescribing clinician accesses a patient’s record.  

Health IT System Suppliers, such as Oracle Corporation UK Limited, should ensure 
that  their  system  defaults  are  configured  accurately  and  appropriately  to  meet  the 
needs of their users in most clinical situations. The circumstances of your report relate 
to the local configuration of clinical decision support / alert functionality within the EPS.  

NHS  England  will  be  engaging  with  Oracle  Corporation  UK  Limited  on  the  issues 
raised.  I  note  that  you  have  also  addressed  your  Report  to  Oracle  Corporation  UK 
Limited, and we have been sighted on their response to you dated 27 June 2024. We 
note that they state they have not found any defect or fault with their software, and 
that  they  are  open  to  exploring  with  RSFT  whether  any  configuration  changes, 
alterations to working practices and additional training may assist to further mitigate 
any clinical risks. Any identified learnings could be facilitated through their dedicated 
User Groups and/or general guidance could also be provided on how to best design 

                                                                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
  
 and implement prescribing clinical decision support for clinical systems. NHS England 
will also ensure that the concerns raised in your Report are shared with systems by 
our Regulation 28 Working Group regional representatives.  

The  NHS  Digital  Medicines  Programme  commissions  a  system  called  the  e-
Prescribing Risk and Safety Evaluation (ePRaSE), which is a tool that supports NHS 
Trusts in configuring their Electronic Prescribing and Medicines Administration (ePMA) 
systems,  to  mitigate  prescribing  risks  and  improve  safety.  There  could  be  scope  to 
incorporate a test script to explore this issue in future iterations of ePRaSE, and this 
will be considered by the team.   

NHS England has also engaged with the Royal Surrey NHS Foundation Trust on the 
concerns raised in your  Report and note that there has also been escalation of the 
issues raised in your Report across regional and national digital teams. We would refer 
you  to  the  Trust  for  further  information  on  their  system  configurations  and  agreed 
processes.  

I  would  also  like  to  provide  further  assurances  on  the  national  NHS  England  work 
taking place around the Reports to Prevent Future Deaths. All reports received are 
discussed  by  the  Regulation  28  Working  Group,  comprising  Regional  Medical 
Directors  and  other  clinical  and  quality  colleagues  from  across  the  regions.  This 
ensures  that  key  learnings  and  insights  around  events,  such  as  the  sad  death  of 
William, are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps us 
to  pay  close  attention  to  any  emerging  trends  that  may  require  further  review  and 
action.   

Thank you for bringing these important patient safety issues to my attention and please 
do not hesitate to contact me should you need any further information.  

Yours sincerely,  

National Medical Director

Oracle Corporation UK Limited 

Mrs. Joanne Andrew, 
Area Coroner for West Sussex, Brighton and Hove, 
Record Office, 
Orchard Street 
Chichester, 
West Sussex, 
PO19 1DD 

Dear Madam, 

Re: Response to Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths dated 29 April 2024 

27 June 2024 

1. 

This  is  Oracle  Corporation  UK  Limited’s  (formerly  Cerner  Limited)  (“Oracle  Health”)  response 
(the “Response”) to the Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths originally dated 29 April 
2024 and as amended on 18 June 2024 (the “Report”). The Report was issued by Area Coroner 
Mrs. Joanne Andrews (the “Area Coroner”) following an Inquest opened on 23 September 2022 
into  the  death  of  the  Deceased  on  6  September  2022  (the  “Inquest”).  Oracle  Health  was  not 
invited to participate in the Inquest or given an opportunity to make representations and was not 
aware of it until receiving the Report. 

A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

2. 

Oracle Health deeply regrets and was saddened to learn of the various medical omissions at the 
Royal  Surrey  County  Hospital  (“Royal  Surrey”)  (albeit  not  causative  or  contributory  to  the 
Deceased’s  death)  and  extends  its  condolences  to  the  family  of  the  Deceased  and  others 
bereaved. Oracle Health assures the Deceased’s family that Oracle Health takes the contents of 
the Report extremely seriously and that in response to it, Oracle Health conducted a thorough 
and in-depth review of the Millennium software deployed and in operation at Royal Surrey. 

3.  While there is no suggestion that the software at issue was in anyway at fault or contributed to 
the Deceased’s death, Oracle Health conducted a review as described more fully in this Response 
and concludes as follows (key findings are highlighted in bold throughout): 

3.1. 

3.2. 

Oracle Health has not identified any evidence of any defect in its software. The Millennium 
software was working as designed and configured in conjunction with the Royal Surrey 
NHS  Foundation  Trust  (“RSFT”)  and  another  NHS  Trust  on  the  software  domain, 
including subsequent modifications made independently of Oracle Health.1 

Electronic  alert  notifications  are  most  appropriately  accessed  within  an  individual’s 
electronic patient record (“EPR”) as opposed to, for example, at the point of a prescribing 
clinician logging into Millennium. Otherwise, there is a risk of clinicians being deluged with 

1 

A software domain is an administrative structure for organising, accessing and delivering software services and enables 
multiple customers  to share  the  same computing  resources. In the  present  instance,  RSFT  and  another  NHS  Trust 
shared a common software domain. 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 alert  notifications  from  multiple  patients,  including  those  for  whom  they  are  no  longer 
medically responsible. Sending notifications externally (e.g., by e-mail) is subject to the 
same  concerns  and  both  removes  the  ability  to  monitor  the  acknowledgement  of  alert 
notifications  and  risks  patient  sensitive  information  being  incorrectly  disseminated  or 
exposed to cyberattacks. 

RSFT chose to override the default configuration and limit the recipients of Anti-Infective 
Alert Notifications (as defined below) to prescribers only, thereby preventing other users 
from acting as a failsafe. 

The alert notification system is not intended to serve as a substitute in place of the clinical 
protocol to access individual patient EPRs daily and it would be improper for it to do so. 
To the  extent that there is  concern about  prescribers  not accessing  the  EPR, this is a 
clinical  workflow  issue.  Ultimately,  no  amount  of  alert  notifications  can  address  the 
shortcomings  of  a  prescriber  failing  to  follow  a  clinical  workflow  or  not  observing 
underlying standards of care. 

Oracle Health has no record of RSFT raising any clinical safety or other issues relating to 
Anti-Infective  Alert  Notifications  during  the  Millennium  training  process  or  post  go  live. 
RSFT  raised  no  service  or  test  issues  regarding  such  alert  notifications  as  part  of  the 
deployment testing process or subsequent to the systems going live in May 2022. 

Oracle  Health  does  not  consider  that  any  enhancement  to  the  alert  notifications  can 
address  a  clinical  workflow  issue  but  is  open  to  exploring  with  RSFT  whether  any 
configuration changes, alterations to working practices, or additional training may assist 
to further mitigate any clinical risks. 

3.3. 

3.4. 

3.5. 

3.6. 

B. ORACLE HEALTH AND MILLENNIUM 

4. 

5. 

6. 

Oracle Health’s Millennium software has been successfully deployed globally, first in the United 
States in 1984 and since 1986 internationally. Oracle Health has licensed its solution at 28,000 
facilities  around  the  world,  and  has  adapted  Millennium  to  various  types  of  facilities,  including 
3,000  hospitals,  3,500  physician  practices,  200  home  health  facilities  and  200  employer  sites. 
Oracle Health’s clients include over 39 NHS Trusts. 

Oracle Health designed Millennium as an electronic patient record solution. The solution creates 
an  electronic  medical  record  through  which  physicians  can  access  near  real  time  data.  By 
organising the data around the patient, rather than the patient encounter, Millennium eliminates 
duplication and places data only once in a central repository. Millennium enables information from 
disparate clinical domains and multiple facilities to be seamlessly integrated. 

The Millennium solution currently comprises nine solution and service sets with sub-modules. The 
relevant  sub-module  for  the  purposes  of  the  Response  is  Medications  Management,  which 
covers  prescription  workflows, 
including  documenting  medication  history,  medication 
reconciliation and verification, the prescribing process and discharge and outpatient medicines. 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 C. CONFIGURATION AND DEPLOYMENT OF MEDICATIONS MANAGEMENT AT RSFT 

7. 

8. 

9. 

In  December  2019,  RSFT  and  another  Trust  client  signed  an  agreement  to  implement  Oracle 
Health’s Millennium solution. Millennium went live at Royal Surrey in May 2022. 

The initial steps in the deployment of the Millennium solution involves an assessment of a client’s 
existing systems, an evaluation of their objectives and a demonstration of the relevant solutions 
in default configuration. Following the initial consultation process, Oracle Health hosted a series 
of design and configuration workshops (“D&C  Workshops”) for RSFT between around August 
2020 and the beginning of January 2021. Workshops covering Medications Management were 
hosted by Oracle Health’s Medication Process team and were attended by subject matter experts 
empowered  to  make  design  decisions  on  behalf  of  RSFT.  It  is  critical  to  the  success  of 
deployments  that  appropriate  decision-makers  attend  these  sessions  and  they  are  required  to 
have a solid understanding of the workflow processes within their areas of expertise. 

There  are  no  specific  Government  or  NHS  regulations,  or  guidance,  governing  how  alert 
notifications  for  anti-infective  prescriptions  are  generated  in  electronic  healthcare  systems. 
However,  as  an  experienced  industry  leader  in  electronic  healthcare,  Oracle  Health  has 
developed content, workflows and decision support to help meet the potential needs of its client 
base. As part of the D&C Workshops, RSFT representatives were given the opportunity to tailor 
certain aspects of Medications Management functionality to the specific needs and workflows of 
RSFT. Post go-live, RSFT had the option to implement additional configuration changes through 
Oracle  Health’s  ‘Apps  Services’  team.  However,  RSFT  decided  to  make  certain  configuration 
changes to Millennium and Medications Management on its own, independently of Oracle Health 
and  without  the  benefit  of  its  institutional  knowledge  and  guidance  as  to  best  practice.  Oracle 
Health  is  necessarily  unable  to  comment  on  such  configuration  changes  where  it  has  no 
awareness of them. 

10.  Oracle Health understands that the Area Coroner did not have the benefit of a written, or visual, 

description of alert notifications in respect of anti-infectives. In default configuration: 

10.1.  Anti-infectives are prescribed using the ‘order’ tab in a patient’s EPR. After selecting the 
relevant  medicine,  prescribers  must  complete  a  mandatory  form  and  sign  the  order  to 
complete the prescription. Prescribers are shown alert notifications during the prescribing 
process if: (a) a patient’s weight and allergies have not been documented in the preceding 
28 days; or (b) a prescriber has selected a duration of doses rather than days of medication. 

10.2.  Following the prescription of an anti-infective: (a) certain ‘alert notifications’ are displayed 
within a patient’s EPR; and (b) Millennium will display a ‘task’ within the ‘Doctors Worklist’. 

10.3.  Alert  notifications  arise  through  configurable  rules  contained  within  a  module  called 
‘Discern  Expert’ (“Rules”). To assist standard workflows for anti-infectives, customers in 
the UK are offered certain default Rules which they can review and configure during the 
design process (“Default Rules”). 

(a)  Configuration of Anti-Infective Alert Notifications 

11. 

In relation to anti-infective prescriptions, the Default Rules generate three sets of alert notifications 
within a patient’s EPR in default configuration (“Anti-Infective Alert Notifications”).  The Default 
Rules generate Anti-Infective Alert Notifications to all users when they access a patient’s EPR 
save for certain administrative staff: 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 11.1.  72-Hour Alert Notification: Generated 72 hours after the anti-infective is prescribed. The 
purpose of the alert notification is to prompt users to review the prescription, given the risks 
of anti-infective resistance. On viewing the alert notification, a user is directed to complete 
a  review  form  and  can  either:  (a)  state  that  they  are  not  medically  responsible  for  the 
patient; or (b) acknowledge that the patient’s clinical condition, diagnosis and investigations 
have been reviewed and select a relevant action e.g., to stop or continue the anti-infective. 
The Default Rules will continue to generate the 72-Hour Alert Notification each  time the 
patient’s EPR is accessed until the end of the prescription period unless a user conducts 
the  necessary  review.  Screenshots  1  and  2  in  Appendix  1  show  the  72-Hour  Alert 
Notification and accompanying review form in default configuration. 

11.2.  24-Hour Pre-Expiry Alert Notification: Generated 24 hours before the prescription is due 
to expire. On viewing the alert notification, the user is able either to: (a) dismiss the alert 
notification; or (b) document that the alert notification has been acknowledged. If the alert 
notification is dismissed, the Default Rules will continue to generate the 24-Hour Pre-Expiry 
Alert  Notification  for  the  duration  of  the  24-hour  period  each  time  the  patient’s  EPR  is 
accessed  unless  a  user  selects  ‘acknowledge’  and  completes  the  accompanying  form. 
Screenshots 3 and 4 in Appendix 1 show the 24-Hour Pre-Expiry Alert Notification and 
acknowledgment form in default configuration. 

11.3.  24-Hour  Post-Expiry  Alert  Notification: An additional alert notification is generated for 
24 hours after the prescription has expired each time the patient’s EPR is accessed unless 
it is acknowledged. Screenshots 5  and 6  in Appendix 1 show the 24-Hour Post-Expiry 
Alert Notification and the accompanying acknowledgment form in default configuration. 

12.  The Report references staff receiving and “click[ing] off” alert notifications they did not consider 
relevant.  That  appears  to  be  a  reference  either  to:  (a)  the  option  to  select  ‘not  medically 
responsible’ in the case of the 72-Hour Alert Notification; or (b) the option to ‘dismiss’ the 24-Hour 
Pre and Post Expiry Alert Notifications. Sending the alert notification to individuals who may not 
be medically responsible for the relevant care serves an important function: they operate  as a 
failsafe to ensure that those who are responsible are made aware of the alert notifications if they 
have not received them, for example by raising a face-to-face query with the relevant prescriber. 
In certain circumstances, the Rules will generate a ‘hard stop’ alert notification which cannot be 
dismissed and requires a  user to undertake action there and then. As a matter  of clinical best 
practice these ‘hard stop’ alert notifications are used in very limited circumstances so as to avoid, 
for  example,  disrupting  urgent  tasks  which  may  need  to  be  completed  for  the  patient  in  other 
workflows. It is not practical to target particular alert notifications to particular clinicians because 
of the frequent changeover in care and the fact that the recipients would be swiftly superseded. 

13.  As noted above, RSFT was given the opportunity to make certain configuration changes to the 
Default Rules during the D&C Workshops. The scope of changes that could be made included 
the content, frequency, period and recipients of the alert notifications. RSFT retained the three 
alert notifications referenced above with the following configuration changes: 

13.1.  Recipients: RSFT decided to limit recipients of the Anti-Infective Alert Notifications 
technicians  and  non-medical 
to  doctors,  pharmacists,  nurses,  pharmacy 
prescribers.  The  Report  suggests  that  after  the  Deceased’s  death,  RSFT  further 
limited the  recipients of these  alert notifications to prescribers only. Oracle Health 
was not consulted in relation to this latter change and was not aware that it had been made. 

13.2.  72-Hour  Alert  Notification:  RSFT  decided  to  include  a  ‘Long  Term  Anti-Infective’  field 
which, if selected, would disable the 72-Hour Alert Notification. Oracle Health understands 

4 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 that RSFT subsequently made an additional modification to change the 72-Hour Alert 
Notification to a 48-hour alert notification. 

13.3.  24-Hour  Pre  and  Post  Expiry  Alert  Notifications:  RSFT  disabled  the  24-Hour  Post- 
Expiry  Alert  Notification  if  a  user  had  acknowledged  the  24-Hour  Pre-Expiry  Alert 
Notification. 

13.4.  Additional Alert Notifications: RSFT explored the option of including an additional review 
alert notification which would mirror the existing 72-Hour Alert Notification. This new alert 
notification would fire 5 days after the prescription had started. RSFT ultimately decided 
not to pursue the change prior to go-live. 

14.  The Report suggests that there were a “pre-agreed number of alerts” and that “alerts can be used 
up”. By way of clarification, there is no numerical cap on the number of Anti-Infective Alert 
Notifications  that  can  be  sent  within  the  default  configuration  parameters,  and  no  such 
cap was introduced by RSFT during the D&C Workshops process. 

15. 

In respect of the Report’s observation that “there was a risk that the alerting system would not 
operate to draw attention to the need for prescription review before the medication ceases if no 
prescribing clinician accesses a patient’s record”: 

15.1.  Alert Notifications support various user workflows and are intended to operate as a failsafe 
against  human  error  or  oversight  compared  with  traditional  paper-based  systems. 
However,  alert  notifications  do  not  replace  the  need  for  users  to  follow  clinical 
workflows or underlying duties or standards of care. This includes, for example, the 
general  requirement  (subject  to  certain  exceptions)  that  “patients  should  be 
reviewed  by  a  consultant  at  least  ONCE  EVERY  24  HOURS,  seven  days  a  week, 
unless it has been determined that this would not affect the patient’s care pathway”.2 

15.2.  Electronic  alert  notifications  must  operate  within  the  confines  of  the  Millennium 
system and having alert notifications sent externally (e.g., by e-mail) would be less 
effective and risks unacceptable data security breaches. 

15.2.1.  Displaying alert notifications when a clinician or other user logs into Millennium, as 
opposed  to  when  they  open  a  particular  patient’s  EPR,  has  historically  been 
considered and continues to be considered by clinical subject matter experts within 
the  ‘Meds  Management  Special  Interest  Group’  as  unworkable.  In  particular,  a 
substantial volume of alert notifications would be sent to a large number of users, 
many  of  whom  will  have  no,  or  no  ongoing  involvement,  in  a  patient’s  journey.  A 
patient can be seen, for example, by a number of different users depending on shift 
patterns  and  medical  need.  Such  a  system  would  be  inefficient,  and  risk  ‘alert 
fatigue’3 and disruption of important workflows. 

15.2.2.  Sending alert notifications externally (e.g., by e-mail) would be similarly unworkable, 
and still risks inundating inboxes with notifications of no immediate relevance to that 
user. E-mail notifications maintain the requirement for clinicians and other users to 
follow  clinical  workflows  to  take  the  required  action,  but  bring  attendant  risk  from 
being  housed  outside  the  Millennium  system.  In  particular:  (a)  viewing  alert 
notifications by e-mail removes the ability of Millennium to monitor acknowledgments 

2 

3 

NHS Seven Day Services Clinical Standards (Version 2, 8 February 2022), Item 8. 
Broadly defined as a high volume of alert notifications causing users, including clinicians, to become desensitised and 
ignoring or failing to respond appropriately to such alert notifications. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 with a corresponding loss of visibility and accountability; (b) e-mails would delay the 
time taken to respond to alert notifications with users still being required to log into 
the  system  in  order  to  action  them;  and  (c)  patient  sensitive  information  in  e-mail 
inboxes is subject to increased risk of erroneous dissemination or cyberattacks. 

15.3.  Accordingly, alert notifications must be displayed in context at an appropriate location to 
ensure that they are manageable and viewable by relevant users. The most logical way 
to organise  and display  alert notifications is through the individual patient’s EPR. 
The  EPR  is  Millennium’s  central  repository  for  key  medical  information  for  each 
patient. Users with active involvement in a patient’s care should routinely access the 
EPR, including as a result of best practice and standards of care. If such users access 
the EPR, alert notifications will be displayed to the most relevant users at any given time. 
Ultimately,  however,  no  alert  notification  can  compel  a  user  to  login  to  Millennium  or  to 
consult the EPR. 

15.4.  As  noted  above,  an  important  mitigant  against  prescribers  failing  to  access  the  EPR  at 
regular  intervals  is  to  ensure  that  a  wide  user-base  receives  alert  notifications  when 
checking a patient’s record. By limiting the pool of recipients to prescribers only, RSFT risks 
diluting an important failsafe because other users are no longer able to see and act on alert 
notifications.  Moreover,  as  noted  above,  the  number  of  alert  notifications  in  each  alert 
notification period cannot be “used up” so there is no downside  to presenting them to a 
wide user-base, even if some portion of those users select “not medically responsible” or 
dismiss the alert notification. 

(b)  Tasks within the Doctors Worklist within Millennium 

16. 

In  addition  to  the  above  referenced  alert  notifications,  Millennium  will  display  in  the  ‘Doctors 
Worklist’  a  ‘task’  to  complete  the  anti-infective  review  24  hours  after  prescription  (“24-Hour 
Task”). The Doctors Worklist is a patient dashboard which displays an overview of each patient 
assigned  to  a  particular  clinician.  The  24-Hour  Task  provides  clinicians  with  an  opportunity  to 
complete  the  review  before  the  72-Hour  Alert  Notification  is  generated.  Screenshot  7  in 
Appendix 1 shows the 24-Hour Task as it appears within the Doctors Worklist. 

(c)  Testing, Training and Ongoing Monitoring of Medications Management by RSFT 

17.  Oracle Health has no record of RSFT raising any clinical safety issues relating to alert notifications 
or tasks for anti-infective prescriptions during the Millennium training process or additional support 
period. Further, RSFT raised no relevant service or test issues as part of the deployment testing 
process or subsequent to the systems going live in May 2022. 

D.  POTENTIAL ENHANCEMENTS TO MEDICATIONS MANAGEMENT AS DEPLOYED AT RSFT 

18.  Oracle  Health  continuously  engages  in  ongoing  dialogue  with  its  clients  regarding  potential 
software code and configuration enhancements to its Millennium solutions. Such enhancements 
can arise at the global, or national, level in response to the knowledge and experience gained by 
Oracle  Health  from  working  with  its  extensive  client  base.  They  can  also  arise  in  response  to 
specific issues at the level of local deployments. In each case, Oracle Health will discuss with its 
client the appropriateness of taking a potential upgrade and its impact on existing workflows and 
the user interface. Ultimately, the decision on whether to take a particular code or configuration 
enhancement remains with the client and can involve clinical and commercial considerations. 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 19.  Oracle  Health  considers  that  the  anti-infective  alert  notification  features  are  appropriate  and 
functioning  as  designed.  To  the  extent  the  Area  Coroner’s  concern  relates  to  prescribers  not 
accessing the EPR, this is respectfully an issue in the clinical workflow which cannot be addressed 
through further alert notifications. Nevertheless, Oracle Health will: 

19.1.  Explore  with  RSFT  whether  Oracle  Health  can  assist  with  any  configuration  or  other 
changes that could assist in facilitating adherence to the clinical workflow. In particular, 
RSFT may consider increasing the categories of users who receive Anti-Infective Alert 
Notifications to restore the failsafe built into the Default Rules. 

19.2.  More generally, Oracle  will also  discuss with RSFT the benefits of: (a) establishing an 
alert notifications committee as part of its healthcare information technology governance, 
to review existing alert notifications or identify new alert notifications for development; (b) 
defining,  documenting  and  regularly  reviewing  how  it  works  with  alert  notifications  in 
digital solutions through a published Standard Operating Practice; and (c) working more 
closely with Oracle Health’s ‘Apps Services’ team for future configuration changes. 

19.3.  Offer  supplemental  training  packages  by  Oracle  Health  of  RSFT  staff  in  their  use  and 

operation of Medications Management as may be considered helpful. 

Yours faithfully, 

, Vice President, and General Manager 

For and on behalf of Oracle Corporation UK Limited 

Copy to: 

(i) 

,  National  Medical  Director,  NHS  England  &  NHS  Improvement,  NHS 
England  London,  Wellington  House,  133-135  Waterloo  Road,  London,  SE1  8UG 

(ii)  The  Chief  Coroner,  Room  C09,  Royal  Courts  of  Justice,  London,  WC2A  2LL 

(chiefcoronersoffice@judiciary.uk). 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 APPENDIX 1 - SCREENSHOTS 

Screen 1: 72-Hour Alert Notification in default configuration 

Screen 2: 72-Hour Alert Notification review form in default configuration 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Screen 3: 24-Hour Pre-Expiry Alert Notification in default configuration 

Screen 4: 24-Hour Pre-Expiry Alert Notification acknowledgment form in default configuration 

Screen 5: 24-Hour Post-Expiry Alert Notification in default configuration 

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Screen 6: 24-Hour Post-Expiry Alert Notification acknowledgment form in default configuration 

Screen 7: 24-Hour Task in default configuration 

10