Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

Rachel Gibson

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0476, written 30 Aug 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report30 Aug 2024
Reference2024-0476
DeceasedRachel Gibson
CoronerPhilip Barlow
Coroner areaCambridgeshire and Peterborough
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.

Regulation 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS

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

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT DEATHS

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:

1.

, President of Royal College of Anaesthetists

1

CORONER

I am Philip BARLOW, Assistant Coroner for the coroner area of Cambridgeshire and
Peterborough

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 20 July 2022 I commenced an investigation into the death of Rachel Gibson, age 47.
The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 21 August 2024. The conclusion of
the inquest was:

Medical Cause of Death:

1a Hypoxic-Ischaemic Brain Injury
1b Cardiorespiratory arrest caused by infiltration of local anaesthetic during surgery
1c Right hip replacement (April 2022)

Narrative conclusion:

Rachel Gibson sustained irreversible brain damage following cardiac arrest caused
by administration of excessive local anaesthetic (Ropivacaine) during surgery.

4

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

Dr Rachel Gibson had severe osteoarthritis and underwent hip replacement surgery at Spire
Lea Hospital, Cambridge on 12 April 2022. Towards the end of the procedure an infiltration
of Ropivacaine was used in excess of the recommended dose. Upon return to her room she
suffered an unwitnessed cardiac arrest. She was resuscitated and transferred to
Addenbrooke’s Hospital where she was found to have sustained irreversible brain damage.
She died at Addenbrooke’s Hospital on 14 July 2022.

The evidence was that it is routine practice before the procedure for the anaesthetist to
give oral instructions to the scrub nurse specifying the type and dose of local anaesthetic to
be used to infiltrate the operation site. Towards the end of the operation the scrub nurse
hands the local anaesthetic to the surgeon who then carries out the infiltration.

The intention in this case was for a 0.2% solution of Ropivacaine to be diluted 50/50 with
normal saline before it was infiltrated. The evidence suggested that this was not done. The
result was that excessive Ropivacaine was administered by mistake.

The evidence at the inquest was that this type of practice is common nationally.

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 5

CORONER’S CONCERNS

During the course of the investigation my inquiries 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:
(brief summary of matters of concern)

1.

The responsibility for checking and administering the local anaesthetic is unclear:

1.

2.

3.

4.

The instruction was given orally and not written down by the anaesthetist
(the prescriber).

The anaesthetist did not check what the nurse had written down.

The nurse drew up the local anaesthetic from a stock bag and checked this
with another nurse, but not with the anaesthetist.

The nurse then handed the drawn-up anaesthetic to the surgeon to
administer.

2.

3.

There is inconsistency in the way the local anaesthetic was prescribed. The
evidence was that the drug was sometimes specified in millilitres and sometimes in
milligrams. This is of particular concern when the intention is for the drug to be
diluted. If the drug is always prescribed in milligrams then the scope for error may
be reduced.

The hospital in question has now introduced a system for labelling and
countersigning the drug that is being given during the operation. However, the
evidence at the inquest was that, on a national basis, there is wide variation in the
way local anaesthetic is prescribed, checked and administered in this type of
procedure; and that it is common to use similar practice to that which occurred
during this operation. This is why I believe I am under a duty to draw it to your
attention.

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 29 October 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.
COPIES and PUBLICATION

8

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested
Persons

4.

Dr Gibson’s family

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

 Spire Lea Hospital

5.

6.

7.

8.

I have also sent it to

I have also sent it to
Addenbrooke’s Hospital (where Dr Gibson died) who may find it useful or of interest.

(who gave expert evidence) and to

and

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 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 by the Chief Coroner.

9

Dated: 30/08/2024

Philip BARLOW
Assistant Coroner for
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough

Regulation 28 – After Inquest
Document Template Updated 30/07/2021

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 Royal College of Anaesthetists (PDF)
29th October 2024 

Dear Mr Barlow, 

Re: Regulation 28: Report to Prevent Future Deaths in the matter of Rachel Gibson 

Thank you for sending us a copy of your report regarding the tragic death of Dr Gibson. We have 
reviewed the information available to us in the report via our Safe Anaesthesia Liaison Group 
(SALG). SALG is a collaborative project between the Association of Anaesthetists, NHS England’s 
Patient Safety team and the Royal College of Anaesthetists. One of its core objectives is to 
analyse anaesthesia-related serious incidents and to share the learning with the specialty across 
the UK.  

You highlighted concerns regarding the wide variation in the way local anaesthetic is prescribed, 
checked and administered in procedures where local anaesthetic is infiltrated into the operation 
site. We agree that for any procedure where this surgical technique is used there should be a 
clear protocol in place that is understood and followed by the entire theatre team. This should 
include: 

•  Agreement during the multidisciplinary team brief prior to the procedure, about the type 
and dose of local anaesthetic to be given to each specific patient. The team should 
agree the maximum safe dose of local anaesthetic that can be given to the patient, 
calculated in milligrammes. The concentration of local anaesthetic should be described in 
milligrammes per millilitre and used to calculate the total allowable volume that can be 
injected by the surgeon and/or the anaesthetist. In accordance with the National Safety 
Standards for Invasive Procedures, all staff members who undertake an active role in the 
invasive procedure should be present, including the most senior members of the 
anaesthetic and surgical teams1. Some units have reported that they found it helpful to 
write the agreed drug dose and volume on the theatre whiteboard near to the swab 
counts. 

•  How and where the prescription for local anaesthetic should be documented. For 

example in units that use electronic systems, it might be appropriate to document on the 
e-prescribing system rather than the anaesthetic chart or in the surgeon’s operating notes. 
We recommend that local anaesthetic prescriptions are recorded as ‘the volume in ml of 
a solution containing a specified number of mg/ml of a named local anaesthetic’ to 
simplify any calculations of the total dose of local anesthetic received. We strongly 
encourage manufacturers to make the concentration in mg/ml more prominent on their 
product labelling rather than using percentages. 

•  Mandated pause prior to the surgeon undertaking the infiltration during which the whole 

theatre team verbally confirm that the correct drug, volume and concentration has been 
provided. 

Human factors science indicates that engineered solutions are far more effective at reducing the 
risk of similar events occurring than procedural steps. The use of pre-filled syringes have been 
shown to reduce the risk of drug error by up to seventeen times and the use of a pre-filled syringe 
of local anaesthetic at the correct dilution would have substantially reduced the chance of an 
overdose of local anaesthetic2. We recommend that pre-filled syringes are used by default where 

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 available. Where manufactured pre-filled syringes are not available, we recommend that doses 
are standardised for specific operations by patient weight and that dilutions are drawn up prior to 
the start of the procedure, potentially by colleagues within pharmacy to minimise the 
manipulation of medicines in clinical areas3. Additionally, we recommend that local anaesthetics 
intended for intraoperative local anaesthetic infiltration are not provided in volumes larger than 
100mls per bag to further reduce risk. 

We will disseminate these key safety messages through our regular Patient Safety Update 
publication, which is distributed to all members of the Association of Anaesthetists and Royal 
College of Anaesthetists. Since improvements in practise require multidisciplinary cooperation, we 
have reached out to our surgical colleagues to agree these proposals and ensure that the same 
key safety messages are shared with members of the Royal College of Surgeons of England and 
the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh through the Confidential Reporting System in Surgery 
(CORESS) reports. 

In the longer term, our next National Audit Project (NAP) is concerned with the complications of 
regional anaesthesia. NAPs study rare, but potentially serious complications related to 
anaesthesia in order to improve anaesthetic practice and patient outcomes. Local anaesthetic 
toxicity is one of the complications that will be looked at during the next study. The project is 
currently in the planning stages and we have asked the researchers leading the project to ensure 
that severe local anaesthetic toxicity secondary to surgical infiltration, as happened to Dr Gibson, 
is captured as part of this project.  

We would be happy to respond to any questions that you might have. 

Yours Sincerely 

President 
Royal College of Anaesthetists 

President 
Association of Anaesthetists 

References 
1.  Centre for Perioperative Care, National Safety Standards for Invasive Procedures 2 

(NatSSIPs),2023 (https://cpoc.org.uk/guideline/guidelines-resources-guidelines/national-
safety-standards-invasive-procedures-natssips)  

2.  Adapa RM, Mani V, Murray LJ, et al. Errors during the preparation of drug infusions: a 

randomized controlled trial. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2012; 109: 729–34. 

3.  Royal Pharmaceutical Society, Professional Guidance on the Safe and Secure Handling of 

medicines, 2018 (https://www.rpharms.com/recognition/setting-professional-standards/safe-
and-secure-handling-of-medicines/professional-guidance-on-the-safe-and-secure-handling-
of-medicines)

Related reports

Other reports by Philip Barlow

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.