Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

Jyoti Rao

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0513, written 25 Sep 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report25 Sep 2024
Reference2024-0513
DeceasedJyoti Rao
CoronerChris Morris
Coroner areaManchester South
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Organisation namedTameside and Glossop Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust
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   

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:  
Foundation Trust 

CORONER 

, Chief Executive Officer, Manchester University NHS 

I am Chris Morris, Area Coroner for Greater Manchester (South). 

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. 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5/paragraph/7 
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/part/7/made 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 19th June 2024, Alison Mutch, Senior Coroner for Greater Manchester (South), opened an inquest 
into the death of Jyoti Rao, who died on 20th February 2024 at Tameside General Hospital, Ashton-
under-Lyne, aged 56 years.  The investigation concluded with an inquest which I heard on 16th 
September 2024. 

The inquest determined that Miss Rao died as a consequence of:- 

1)  a) Hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury;  

b) Sepsis on background of end-stage renal failure with failure of transplanted kidney.   

II Traumatic nasogastric tube insertion 

The conclusion of the inquest was a Narrative Conclusion, to the effect that Miss Rao died as a 
consequence of complications arising from renal transplantation.   

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Miss Rao died on the 20th February 2024 at Tameside General Hospital, Ashton-under-Lyne as a 
consequence of Hypoxic-ischaemic brain injury due to sepsis on the background of end-stage renal 
failure with failure of a transplanted kidney.  Miss Rao’s death was contributed to by traumatic 
nasogastric tube insertion. 

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. – 

Whilst the court heard evidence as to the advantages of the ‘Consultant of the Week’ model in 
terms of team working, it is a matter of concern that complex transplant patients such as Miss Rao 
are not allocated a named consultant, who not only (in conjunction with others) can seek to ensure 

 
 
 continuity of care is provided, but also who can take a longer-term view of the patient’s post-
operative course and trajectory when complications arise.   

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.    

YOUR RESPONSE   

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 
20th November 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   

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner, Miss Rao’s brother and sister-in-law, and the 
Trust’s legal team.   

I have also sent a copy to Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust, the Care 
Quality Commission and NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care who may find it useful or of 
interest.   

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.   

Dated:   

25th September 2024 

Signature:     Chris Morris, Area Coroner, Manchester South.

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 Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
Joint Chief Medical Officers’ Office 
Trust Headquarters 
Room 218, Cobbett House 
Oxford Road 
M13 9WL 

20 November 2024 

Mr C Morris 
HM Area Coroner Manchester South 
Coroner’s Office  
1 Mount Tabor Street 
Stockport 
SK1 3AG 

Sent via email only:  

Dear Mr Morris 

Miss Jyoti RAO – Regulation 28: Prevention of Future Deaths 

Thank you for your Regulation 29 Report to Prevent Future Deaths dated 25 September 2024 
addressed  to  Mr  Mark  Cubbon  in  his  capacity  as  Trust  Chief  Executive  of  Manchester 
University NHS Foundation Trust (MFT) following the Inquest into the death of Miss Jyoti Rao 
which you heard on 16 September 2024.   

I have now had the opportunity to acknowledge and consider the matters of concern that were 
raised within your report and which emerged during the inquest of Miss Rao. 

On behalf of the Trust, I would like to extend my sincere condolences to the family of Miss 
Rao for their very great loss. 

The response required from the Trust) is in relation to the following: 

•  Under the current Consultant of the Week model, complex transplant patients are 
not  allocated  a  named  consultant,  who  not  only  (in  conjunction  with  others)  can 
seek to ensure continuity of care is provided but also who can take a longer term 
view of the patient’s post-operative course and trajectory when complications arise 

MFT comprises several adult hospital sites within which Consultant of the Week models are 
utilised. Organisationally the Trust provides clear guidance to clinical teams via the Role and 
Responsibilities  of  the  Lead  (Responsible)  Consultant  Policy  (attached)  and  there  is  an 
organisational  focus  on  consultant  attribution.  Whilst  the  remit  of  this  improvement  work  is 
wider than the specialty transplant service subject of your Regulation 28 report; I hope to offer 
you  additional  assurance  that  across  the  organisation  discussions  in  relation  to  consultant 
attribution,  ownership  and  oversight  of  care  are  taking  place  across  all  clinical  teams.  I 
anticipate that this work will continue to strengthen the delivery of care to our patients utilising 
this model, preventing inconsistencies in practices across the organisation.  

Specialties at Manchester Royal Infirmary (MRI), alongside the other hospitals within MFT and 
nationally, adopt the Consultant of the Week model which is widely recognised as being an 
advantageous care delivery model for patients admitted to hospital. Your concern in respect 
of how this model adequately supports complex transplant patients is however recognised. As 
the Inquest heard, and you referenced within your letter, there are advantages of this model 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 with the presence of a consultant of the week being associated with reducing length of stay 
and improving continuity and communication. 

For patients undergoing transplantation at MRI the consultant surgeon who performed their 
transplant is the responsible consultant. During their hospital admission, patients are under 
the joint care of the surgical and medical (nephrology) teams. Ward based cover is provided 
by  the  consultants  of  the  week  from  both  transplant  surgery  and  renal  medicine  who  work 
together and undertake joint ward rounds. This model works well to provide safe and robust 
cover for all inpatients without being affected by annual leave or other clinical commitments of 
individual consultants. Patients are discussed every Wednesday at the Ward Patient Review 
meeting to ensure input from the wider team; this meeting provides oversight by the primary 
surgeon who remains the lead consultant.  

I acknowledge that whilst the Inquest heard about this process, there was a lack of evidence 
provided to the hearing demonstrating how these arrangements robustly account for the more 
complex transplant patient, particularly those receiving outpatient care. Since the Inquest, I 
can confirm that actions have been taken to strengthen this process, which I have explained 
below.      

The  MRI  Transplant  team  have  modified  the  weekly  Wednesday  Ward  Patient  Review 
meeting,  mentioned  above,  to  make  it  an  MDT  for  discussion  of  complex  patients.  This 
provides  a  more  robust  multidisciplinary  perspective  with  decision  making  that  involves  all 
relevant clinical staff. A significant change is the attendance of the outpatient team to support 
any issues on discharge. 

In addition to this, complex renal transplant patients now have dedicated appointments to be 
seen by a named transplant nephrologist responsible for providing continuity of care for them 
in the outpatient setting. 

Please  accept  my  assurances  that  lessons  have  been  learned  from  this  case  and 
appropriate  actions  have  been  put  in  place  to  address  the  issues  raised.  If  you  require 
anything further, then please do not hesitate to contact me. 

Yours sincerely 

Joint Chief Medical Officer / Responsible Officer 

Encl.  Role & Responsibilities of the Lead (Responsible) Consultant Policy 

Examples of possible lead/attending consultant models for Provider Care teams 

www.mft.nhs.uk 

Incorporating: 
Altrincham Hospital • Manchester Royal Eye Hospital • Manchester Royal Infirmary • North Manchester General Hospital • 
Royal Manchester Children’s Hospital • Saint Mary’s Hospital • Trafford General Hospital • University Dental Hospital of Manchester •  
Wythenshawe Hospital • Withington Community Hospital • Community Services

Related reports

Other reports by Chris Morris

See all →

More reports categorised “Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths”

See all →

Track Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust, 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.