Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024
Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0567, written 22 Oct 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.
| Date of report | 22 Oct 2024 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2024-0567 |
| Deceased | Robert Taylor |
| Coroner | Louise Hunt |
| Coroner area | Birmingham and Solihull |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Organisation named | University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 1 |
Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.
1 2 3 4 REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust CORONER I am Louise Hunt, Senior Coroner for Birmingham and Solihull 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. INVESTIGATION and INQUEST On 4 July 2024 I commenced an investigation into the death of Robert TAYLOR. The investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest. The conclusion of the inquest was; Natural causes contributed to by injuries sustained in a fall when he was not receiving enhanced nursing observations. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH Mr Taylor suffered from prostate cancer was frail and had chronic liver disease. On 29/05/24 he fell in the bathroom at his home address after his leg gave way. He was admitted to Birmingham Heartlands Hospital where he was investigated and treated for pancytopenia, possible infection and dropping HB. He was being nursed in a side room due to the increased risk of infection. In the morning on 11/06/24 he was noted to be very confused and agitated and it was recognised that he required enhanced 1:1 observations. No enhanced observations were put in place. He did have non slip socks and the bed rails were down to reduce the risk of him falling. He received lorazepam to enable a CT scan to be undertaken at 11.06. At around 18.13 he was found face down in his side room with an obvious head injury. A CT scan confirmed bilateral subdural haematomas and a small subarachnoid haemorrhage which were treated conservatively. A bone marrow biopsy confirmed he was sadly suffering from high grade acute myeloid leukaemia and inflammatory markers showed this disease was progressing. He continued to deteriorate and sadly passed away on 21/06/24. Based on information from the Deceased’s treating clinicians the medical cause of death was determined to be: 1a High grade Acute Myeloid Leukaemia 1b 1c 1d II Acute subdural and subarachnoid haemorrhage (traumatic) 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 is as follows. – 1. The central issue in this case relating to the fall on 11/06/24 was the lack of enhanced nursing observations. The Nursing witness was unable to say what steps, if any, had been taken to try to put enhanced observations in place. The Investigation report stated that enhanced observations had been identified as needed but did not expand on what actions were taken, if any, to obtain enhanced observation nor what actions had been taken after the death to ensure enhanced observations for patients that require them. This raises a concern for future deaths. 2. The witnesses and the investigation report did not address the central issue relating to the fall and this raises a concern about the quality of post death investigations being undertaken by the Trust. This raises a concern for future deaths. ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you 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 17 December 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 and to the following Interested Persons: Mr Taylor’s Family I have also sent it to the Medical Examiner, ICS, NHS England, CQC. 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. 5 6 7 8 22 October 2024 9 Signature: Louise Hunt Senior Coroner for Birmingham and Solihull
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.
Executive Office of the Chair & Chief Executive
Chair
Chief Executive
Executive Office
:
:
:
16th December 2024
Mrs Louise Hunt
HM Senior Coroner for Birmingham and Solihull
By way of email only:
Dear Mrs Hunt
Inquest touching the death of Mr Robert Taylor
Response to Regulation 28 Report to prevent future deaths
I am writing in response to the Regulation 28 notice issued following the conclusion of the
inquest on 21 October 2024, into the death of Mr Robert Taylor at Birmingham Heartlands
Hospital.
We have carefully considered the concerns raised within your report to prevent future deaths
and our response is set out below.
1.The central issue in this case relating to the fall on 11/06/24 was the lack of enhanced
nursing observations. The Nursing witness was unable to say what steps, if any, had been
taken to try to put enhanced observations in place. The Investigation report stated that
enhanced observations had been identified as needed but did not expand on what actions
were taken, if any, to obtain enhanced observation nor what actions had been taken after the
death to ensure enhanced observations for patients that require them. This raises a concern
for future deaths.
Within the original learning response (After Action Review) it was identified that the fall in this
case was multifactorial and advised that staff were unable to provide enhanced care to Mr
Taylor within the ‘what could have gone better’ section. There were several factors identified
within the learning response that contributed to the difficulty in being able to provide enhanced
care. Staffing levels in relation to the challenging geography of this ward, including the large
number of side rooms, was a contributory factor in the lack of ability to provide enhanced
care. This ward, not accustomed to conventionally receiving a high level of patients requiring
enhanced care, did receive a substantial number of patients needing enhanced care at the
time, making it even more difficult for this need to be met within the staffing model which did
not consider the unique geography. The creation of a group to review pathways and allocation
of patients across acute medicine, as in the action plan, will improve the ability to meet the
need for any given acute medicine ward to provide enhanced care. Whilst the original learning
response does include actions to address these points it is accepted that witnesses at the
inquest should have been able to explain these points and what had already been put in place.
There will be a nursing workforce review to cover the points above. It is accepted that this
point should have been more explicit within the report and details of the actions set out below
should have been included.
By way of assurance on actions to address the concerns raised around enhanced care as set
out in the action plan in the learning response, the following progress has been made to date:
• The Enhanced Care policy has been re-embedded into the ward and risks are
discussed in the ward huddle following shift handovers.
• Acuity was noted to be a contributing factor within this case. There is currently a SNCT
(Safer Nursing Care Tool) to review of acuity levels as part of the wider Trust review
of acuity and dependency. Whilst this work progresses increased staffing needs will
be identified on a case-by-case basis as per the UHB enhanced care policy. Staff will
be requested through UHB clinical bank services in a timely manner and explored on
a shift-by-shift basis.
• The nurse in charge currently identifies and discusses patients at risk of falls, as well
as those requiring enhanced observations, with the Matron, prior to the 0800-
touchpoint meeting. Since the inquest we have made changes in how this information
is communicated. There is a more risk focused approach being taken and a focus on
vulnerable patients in higher risk environments. If a ward area is unable to provide
assurance that a risk is being mitigated, then additional safety measures to ameliorate
the risk are put into place. Examples include:
o Discussion in the morning safety huddle regarding risk of falls and patients for
whom there is concern.
o Reorganisation of workload to mitigate and reduce risk
o Movement of patients into more appropriately positioned side rooms where
o
possible.
Intermittent checks completed on patients within the side room with
documentation, including:
▪ Ensuring that beds are placed in the lowest position possible
▪ Nursing call bells within reach
▪ Anti slip socks for mobile patients
▪ Walking aids within reach
• We have recognised that the current layout of ward 19 can be challenging when
nursing patients who are at risk of falls because of having only two 6 bedded bays and
13 side rooms positioned in a T shape within the ward. In addition, only 4 side rooms
have partial views (if the door is open), the other 9 have no visibility.
We have spoken to the senior nursing team in charge of the assessment area
regarding environmental challenges and provided a visual map of side rooms, so they
are aware of the physical layout of the ward. We have asked the assessment areas
when allocating patients to be mindful of ward geography and communicate any
concerns and risks that patients have such that plans can be put in place to support
enhanced care and risk of falls.
In the longer term, a wider piece of work is being planned for January 2025 to review
side room utilisation. This will allow us to place the right patients into appropriate side
rooms with a commensurate reduced risk of falls.
• Following the death of Mr Taylor the department is currently delivering falls training,
which is provided by the Falls team and has been attended by qualified nurses and
health care support workers. To date 42.5% of ward staff have completed training with
a further 40% of staff booked on to the training for December 2024. The remaining
staff will complete training by the end of January 2025.
• Ward monitoring of lying and standing blood pressure has met the trust standards of
75%. On-going monitoring will continue to monitor compliance and safety huddles are
reminding staff to review patient’s lying and standing blood pressure on admission or
review this when clinically indicated.
In addition, we are completing a trial of alarmed falls beds and exploring long term
solutions with falls seats and bed alarm pads.
•
• Verbal feedback following the outcome of the original AAR (After Action Review) was
given to staff in relation to completing falls risk assessments on admission and
reviewing the risk of any changes in clinical condition. This is also discussed during
the morning safety huddles with staff. A review of compliance has been undertaken
and shows significant improvement in the completion of falls risk assessments within
the 6 hours target and the ward are currently exceeding the Trust current compliance
of 83.2% at 87.4%. Ward 19 have shown a sustained improvement month on month
with July being 68.6% and November at 87.4%, giving an 18.8% improvement.
Ongoing monitoring of compliance with this standard is taking place to ensure
continuous improvement is sustained.
2. The witnesses and the investigation report did not address the central issue relating to the
fall and this raises a concern about the quality of post death investigations being undertaken
by the Trust. This raises a concern for future deaths.
As part of a drive to improve patient safety within the NHS, all Trusts have adopted the NHSE
Patient Safety Incident Response Framework and within that framework learning responses
[investigations] are to apply a systems-based approach to identify any learning.
It has been identified that a nursing witness was identified shortly before the inquest. This
resulted in the nursing witness attending without having the opportunity to submit a witness
statement which would have otherwise supported them with answering questions. This has
been acknowledged as an oversight on behalf of the Trust on this occasion, as our usual
practice is to identify witnesses earlier on in the process to ensure that they have adequate
time to prepare for an Inquest.
Since the inquest the Lead Nurse for falls has worked with the legal service team to revise the
templates used for the nursing witness statement to ensure that witnesses are capturing
essential information in relation to a fall to assist the Coroner at Inquest. The template provides
additional prompts to enable the witness to write a logical account of the incident, including
the patients care leading up to the fall, how the fall occurred, and post fall care, including any
learning identified.
In addition, our Legal Services Team will ensure that specialist nurse leads for the Trust, for
example those involved in Falls and Tissue Viability, will be involved from the start of a
Coronial investigation or inquest process to ensure they have full awareness of issues and
can contribute to an investigation from a highly experienced professional standpoint.
Regarding witnesses summonsed to attend inquests, the Legal Services Team are ensuring
that our staff are fully prepared to attend an inquest by arranging individual and group
meetings and telephone calls with witnesses and their managers together with meetings with
our instructed solicitors to ensure that staff are supported and are as prepared as fully as they
can be to give evidence at the inquest. In addition, a series of training for ward managers and
nursing staff is being rolled out commencing early next year across all our hospital sites.
I would like to assure you that the concerns raised within the Regulation 28 Report have been
taken extremely seriously, which I hope is demonstrated in the steps that have been taken
following Mr Taylor’s death.
Yours sincerely
Chief Executive
See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching University Hospitals Birmingham 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.