Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2024

John Doyle

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2024-0618, written 12 Nov 2024. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report12 Nov 2024
Reference2024-0618
DeceasedJohn Doyle
CoronerLinda Lee
Coroner areaCoventry and Warwickshire
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Organisation namedUniversity Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust · George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published6

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths 

Coroners and Justice Act 2009 
Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

•  NHS England
• 

The Chief Executive Officer of University Hospital of Coventry and Warwickshire NHS
Trust.
The Chief Executive Officer of George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust.
UK Kidney Association.
British Transplant Society.
Renal Association.

• 
• 
• 
• 

1.  CORONER: 

I am Linda Lee, Assistant Coroner for the coroner area of Coventry and 
Warwickshire 

2.  CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS: 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5 of the Coroners and Justice 
Act 2009 and Regulation 28 of the Coroners’ (Investigations) Regulations 
2013. 

3.  INVESTIGATION AND INQUEST: 

On 9 January 2024, an investigation was commenced into the death of John 
Frederick Doyle, who died on the 30 December 2023 aged 60.  

The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 8 November 2024. 

 The conclusion was: 

1a Multiple Organ Failure 

1b Cytomegalovirus Infection 

1c Chronic kidney disease (unknown aetiology, kidney transplant in 2022) 

II Hypertension 

Natural causes against a background of missed opportunities to diagnose and 
treat cytomegalovirus infection, together with the impact of the resident 
(formerly junior) doctors' strike on the provision of consistent patient care. 

 
 
 
 
 
 4.  CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH: 

In March 2022, John underwent a kidney transplant at Manchester Royal 
Infirmary and subsequently received follow-up care and regular reviews at 
the Royal Derby Hospital (RDH). He was first admitted to George Eliot 
Hospital (GEH) on 2 December 2023, presenting with rectal bleeding and 
a persistent cough. 

Evidence was presented that GEH, like many hospitals, does not have an 
in-house renal team. As a result, GEH relied on telephone consultations 
with specialist hospitals for advice on investigations and treatment for 
renal-related issues.  

During John’s treatment, the team at GEH sought guidance from both 
RDH and University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire (UHCW), the 
latter being the nearest specialist centre. Following John’s admission, tests 
were ordered to rule out cytomegalovirus (CMV) colitis. However, without 
receiving these test results, John was discharged on 6 December, despite 
evidence suggesting he was still very unwell. He was re-admitted via 
emergency ambulance on 8 December. Unsuccessful attempts were made 
to test for the presence of CMV during his stay at GEH. 

John’s condition continued to deteriorate, and he was transferred to 
UHCW on 21 December. A diagnosis was not made until 28 December, 
when tests showed he had 27 million copies of CMV per millilitre of blood, 
an extremely high count. Treatment with ganciclovir and anti-CMV 
immunoglobulin was commenced. By this stage, it is likely that John had 
developed CMV encephalitis. He was intubated and ventilated, but his 
condition declined, leading to multiple organ failure. John died on 30 
December 2023. 

Evidence was received that whilst CMV rarely causes more than cold or 
flu-like symptoms in the general population, it is one of the most common 
infectious complications of solid organ transplantation and is reported to 
increase graft loss and patient mortality. It was acknowledged that an 
earlier diagnosis and treatment of CMV could have potentially changed the 
outcome for John and would have increased the likelihood of successful 
treatment. 

Consultants from both hospitals testified that, due to the junior doctors' 
strike, they had to assume additional responsibilities and manage a higher 
patient load, which affected their ability to maintain a consistent overview 
of patients’ conditions and treatments. In John’s case, the impact was the 
failure to notice that the test results had not been received at both GEH 
and UHCW. 

 
 
 
 
 The patient safety incident investigation by GEH identified human error 
and systemic issues in handling CMV testing and the care of renal 
patients: 

1.  Sample Collection Errors: Multiple errors were identified in sample 

collection for CMV testing: 
o  The laboratory operated by UHCW failed to freeze one sample and 

one sample was incorrectly rejected as unusable 

o  Clinicians used the wrong tubes, failing to use the necessary, 

purple-topped tube that prevents the blood collected from clotting. 
o  Human error led to prompts for correct tube selection being ignored 
and the use of paper labelling did not prompt the use of the correct 
tube. 

o  Expedited testing needs were not clearly communicated, leading to 

delays. 

o  Staff were unaware of the testing schedule in place at UHCW for 

CMV testing 

2.  Documentation and Communication: Medical notes lacked thorough 
documentation on the selection and dispatch of samples, contributing 
to inefficiencies and miscommunication among staff. 

3.  Delayed Transfer to Specialist Care: John should have been 

transferred earlier to UHCW, which has the necessary renal services, 
including dialysis and specialised renal diets. GEH/UHCW lacked the 
protocols for timely patient transfer. The report also recommended that 
patients who are at risk of transplant failure should be managed 
proactively. 

Evidence given at the inquest showed there is currently no clear protocol 
at GEH regarding which hospital to contact for advice or when a patient 
should be considered for transfer to a specialist unit. Additionally, it was 
unclear whether the transfer should be initiated by the specialist centre or 
by GEH. 

Evidence was received that some training had been delivered on the 
correct procedure regarding sampling and that draft protocols were being 
drawn up but were not yet finalised or published. 

None of the consultants from GEH who gave evidence had expertise in 
renal medicine or experience with transplant patients. Additionally, 
although it was planned to develop guidance, only the renal consultant at 
UHCW was familiar with the Renal Association and the British 
Transplantation Society’s guidelines, specifically the ‘Clinical Practice 
Guideline Post-Operative Care in the Kidney Transplant Recipient’.  

This guidance states: 

“This document is intended for those engaged in the care of kidney 
transplant recipients (KTR) who are non-experts. With increasing efforts to 
deliver healthcare locally, many renal transplant recipients are followed up 
in centres remote from the main surgical transplant unit. At the same time, 

 
 
 transplantation medicine has evolved into an increasingly complex and 
specialised field of nephrology. The following guidelines reflect this 
alteration in clinical practice and are intended for those healthcare 
professionals who look after renal transplant patients. They are also 
intended to be useful to both medical and surgical trainees, general 
practitioners, nurse specialists and other associated healthcare 
professionals involved in the care of renal transplant patients.” 

It was noted that the guideline aims to inform and support non-experts 
caring for transplant patients, not to replace assistance from specialist 
centres. It does not appear that there is any specialist guidelines or 
examples of best practice regarding collaborative ways of working 
between specialist and non-specialist centres.  

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 these 
concerns to you. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows: 

Concern 1: Contacting Specialist Centres 
Non-specialist medical staff may have varied understanding of the appropriate 
contacts and timing for engaging with specialist renal hospitals. 

Concern 2: Information Sharing with Specialist Centres 
The specific patient information that non-specialist staff should provide to 
specialist renal hospitals may not always be clearly defined. 

Concern 3: Accessibility to Renal Care Guidelines 
Non-specialist staff may experience varying levels of awareness or 
accessibility to guidelines and protocols for treating kidney transplant patients. 
This could lead to a misunderstanding of the significance and urgency of the 
actions recommended by specialist renal hospitals. 

Concern 4: Transfer Responsibility 
There may be some inconsistency across non-specialist hospitals and renal        
hospitals in understanding who is responsible for initiating patient transfers. 

Concern 5: Decision-Making for Patient Location 
Considerations regarding whether patients should remain in non-specialist 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 areas or be transferred may differ, potentially affecting consistency in care 
approaches. 

Concern 6: Coordination Between Specialist and Non-Specialist 
Hospitals 
There may be variation in how specialist renal hospitals engage with non-
specialist hospitals that rely on their expertise, impacting collaborative efforts 
 Currently, there is no clear guidance on how specialist and 
in patient care. 
non-specialist teams should work together effectively to ensure consistent, 
high-quality care for these patients. 

6.  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. 

7.  YOUR RESPONSE: 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of 
this report, namely by 7 January 2025. I, the coroner, may extend the period if 
necessary. 
Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, 
setting out the timetable for action. Alternatively, you must explain why no 
action is proposed. 

8.  COPIES AND PUBLICATION: 

I have sent a copy of my report to the following interested persons: 

o 
o 
o 

o 
o 
o 
o 
o 

John’s family
NHS England
The Chief Executive Officer of University Hospital of Coventry
and Warwickshire NHS Trust
The Chief Executive of George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust
UK Kidney Association
British Transplant Society
Renal Association
I am also under a duty to send a copy of this report to the Chief
Coroner and to publish it on the Judiciary website but may redact the
report before publication if appropriate.

9.  DATED: 12 November 2024 

Linda Lee 
Assistant Coroner for Coventry and Warwickshire

Responses

6 responses 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 1 From Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership Trust (PDF)
INHS

University Hospitals

Coventry and Warwickshire
NHS Trust

University Hospital
Clifford Bridge Road

1 Walsgrave
Your os Coventry
Our ref: CV2 2DX

6 January 2025 www.uhew.nhs.uk

Ms Linda Lee

Assistant Coroner for Coventry and Warwickshire
Warwickshire Justice Centre

Newbold Terrace

Leamington Spa

CV32 4EL

Dear Ms Lee

Requlation 28 Report — Mr John Doyle

Thank you for your email of 12 November 2024 enclosing a Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future
Deaths which is addressed to a number of organisations which include University Hospitals Coventry
and Warwickshire NHS Trust (UHCW) following the inquest into the death of Mr Doyle.

As you are aware from the evidence of the medical witnesses at the inquest on 8 November 2024,
the renal team at UHCW have been developing guidelines to assist George Eliot Hospital (GEH), a
non-renal specialist hospital, in the management of acutely unwell kidney transplant renal inpatients.
We are pleased to report that these guidelines have been finalised and agreed between the Trusts
and we enclose a copy.

These guidelines have been shared and cascaded within the respective clinical teams which includes
discussion as the Trust’s Renal Quality Improvement and Patient Safety meeting (QIPS). Once
ratified through the usual governance processes these guidelines will be placed on the Trust's
intranet to be accessible to all staff.

In addition, both Trusts have agreed a Service Level Agreement (SLA) which means that a member
of UHCW’s renal team will attend GEH and review their renal inpatients on GEH request up to twice a
week.

One of our senior Transplant Nephrologists has liaised with UK Kidney Association who are in
agreement with the measures taken by UHCW and GEH in response to this report.

We believe these combined measures address the 6 concerns set out in your Report and will
undoubtedly improve patient care and lead to better collaborative working.

Chief Executive Officer: Chair:

Taking the concerns that you have raised in turn we respond as follows:
Concern 1: Contacting Specialist Centres

The SLA between the Trusts enables GEH to contact the UHCW renal team and request an on-site
attendance. This will mean that a UHCW nephrologist will attend to review renal patients where their
input is required up to twice a week.

In addition, the current processes for GEH to contact specialist have been outlined in the guidelines,
including contacting the renal team and also the virology team.

Concern 2: Information Sharing with Specialist Centres

The SLA and guideline set up a clear framework to ensure good communication between the Trusts
including timely investigation and treatment. Additionally, processes to document communication
between renal department and other hospitals, “referapatient.org” is being considered.

Concern 3: Accessibility to Renal Care Guidelines

The guidelines have been agreed with the relevant departments and shared with GEH. Both UHCW
and GEH have worked closely to ensure the guidelines communicate the relevant information in an
easily understandable manner, whilst ensuring the urgency is conveyed. Guidelines have been
cascaded within the respective clinical teams and will be placed on the UHCW intranet once they
have been through the governance process for ratification.

Concern 4: Transfer Responsibility

The SLA which provides that a renal specialist will attend GEH on request should help identify those
patients requiring urgent transfer. UHCW will be responsible to accept all renal patients admitted to
GEH, regardless of their parent hospital. In addition, the internal processes to highlight which
patients need urgent transfer have been changed (we now have a daily huddle at 11.30am with the
UHCW Medicine Operational team where a renal doctor is present, so that interhospital transfers can
be highlighted and appropriately prioritised).

Concern 5: Decision-Making for Patient Location

The SLA will support decision-making for patient location by ensuring face to face communication
between senior medical staff from UHCW and GEH. We anticipate that the guideline will also support
this, in that investigations and results will be more timely available and reviewed.

Concern 6: Coordination Between Specialist and Non-Specialist Hospitals

It is usually the case that a non-specialist hospital will contact the parent specialist hospital where that
particular patient has been having their routine renal care. However, following this Regulation 28,
UHCW will now be the primary specialist transfer centre for all renal patients admitted to GEH
regardless of their parent specialist unit. The agreed shared guidelines and SLA will ensure closer
working and improved patient care.

Chief Executive Officer: PY Chair: P|

Please do not hesitate to get in contact should any further information be required.

Yours sincerely

Chief Executive Officer

Chief Executive Officer: Professor Andrew Hardy Chair: Sue Noyes
Response from 1 From George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust (PDF)
George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust 
College Street 
Nuneaton 
Warwickshire 
CV10 7DJ 

Your Ref.: 10718704 
Our Ref.: RN/LJW – Doyle 

2 January 2025 

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL 

Ms L Lee 
HM Assistant Coroner 
Warwickshire Justice Centre 
Newbold Terrace 
Leamington Spa 
CV32 4EL 

Dear Ms Lee 

RE: REGULATION 28 REPORT – JOHN DOYLE 

Further to your report dated the 12 November 2024, in accordance with paragraph 7, Schedule 5 of 
the Coroner’s and Justice Act 2009 and the regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroner’s (investigations) 
Regulations 2013, I offer the following response:-   

As  reported  on the  day of the  inquest  (8th  November  2024)  the  University  Hospitals  of  Coventry  & 
Warwickshire (UHCW) were compiling guidelines to assist the George Eliot Hospital (GEH) should 
the Trust have an inpatient with similar health conditions in the future as there is no renal specialist 
service at the GEH. 

The Trust has now received management guidelines from the Renal Team at UHCW and below is a 
table showing what actions the Trust has taken to embed the information received. 

Description 
New guidelines to be made easily 
accessible on the Trust’s intranet 

Quick reference guidelines for management 
of acute unwell kidney transplant recipients 
have been produced (a laminated poster 
will be displayed in clinical areas) 
Guidelines to be discussed at the daily 
doctors briefing 

To be discussed at all Trust wide 
Governance meetings for them to share 
with all consultants/relevant members of 
staff 

Action Taken 
Guidelines have been developed and are currently 
going through the Trust’s ratification process prior 
to  uploading on to the Trust’s intranet. 
Posters have been shared for dissemination with 
the Directorate  Governance Leads on the 12 
December 2024. These will be discussed at the 
Directorate Governance Meeting. 
Information on the new guidelines and how to 
access them formed part of the daily brief for wards 
and departments from the 16 to the 20 December 
2024.  On the 17 December the guidelines and 
quick reference was e-mailed to all doctors and 
consultants. This will be reiterated at the Doctors 
Grand Round 
Shared with all Directorate Governance Leads on 
the 12 December 2024 for dissemination. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Making staff aware of the referral process 
asking UHCW renal staff to visit a patient 
on the ward 

This is in the guidelines and is a consultant to 
consultant referral process. The process has been 
shared as per above. 

Your concerns were:- 

1.  Contacting Specialist Centres 

Following the inquest on 8 November 2024, our Consultant Governance Lead for the Medicine 
Directorate has continued to liaise with the Consultant Renal Specialist at UHCW to develop 
robust joint clinical guidelines. GEH will take every case individually as they present and will also 
contact the appropriate Trust where the patient is receiving their renal care.  As well as 
guidelines from UHCW a laminated quick reference guide has been produced which contains the 
emergency contact numbers for renal services at UHCW. This will be displayed across the Trust.  

Patients who are pregnant with on-going renal conditions/transplant would be transferred to 
UHCW as part of the Maternal Medicine Pathway. 

2.  Information Sharing with Specialist Centres 

The guidelines (enclosure 1) illustrate the sample collection requirements, together with what to 
do if the results are positive and the telephone numbers to be used. Clinical staff will liaise at the 
earliest with the specialist centre as results dictate.  This is documented on the enclosed 
guideline.  

3.  Accessibility to Renal Care and Guidelines 

The guidelines provided by UHCW will be available on the intranet once the Trust’s ratification 
process has been followed.  Guidelines have already been shared with all Directorates to make 
sure that the relevant clinical staff are aware of the guidelines.   

4.  Transfer Responsibility 

Consultant to consultant clinical conversations will take place if there is a requirement to transfer 
the patient to the renal centre. There is a Service Level Agreement (SLA) in place for a renal 
specialist from UHCW to visit renal patients being cared for a GEH, twice a week.  This patient 
familiarisation will assist in the timely transfer process should the patient need to be relocated to 
the specialist centre. 

5.  Decision Making For Patient Location 

There is a consultant to consultant referral process in place where decisions are made on the 
location based on the patients clinical need.  

6.  Co-Ordination Between Specialist and Non-Specialist Hospitals. 

The guidelines from UHCW are very clear on when they should be invoked and the quick 
reference guides will make it easier for GEH staff. 

I hope this answers your outstanding concerns, but please do not hesitate to contact me if you 
require any clarification. 

Yours sincerely 

Dr Najam Rashid 
Chief Medical Officer 
enc.1 Guidelines for Management of Acute Unwell Kidney Transplant Recipients - For use at GEH – 
in consultation with UHCW Renal Service
Response from 2 From Coventry and Warwickshire Partnership Trust (PDF)
University Hospital 
Clifford Bridge Road 
Walsgrave 
Coventry 
CV2 2DX 

Direct Line: 

www.uhcw.nhs.uk 

Your ref: 
Our ref: 

30 January 2025 

Ms Linda Lee 
Assistant Coroner for Coventry and Warwickshire 
Warwickshire Justice Centre  
Newbold Terrace  
Leamington Spa 
CV32 4EL 

Dear Ms Lee 

Regulation 28 Report – Mr John Doyle 

Thank you for your  email of 9 January 2025.  In response to the additional points raised by the  UK 
Kidney  Association  (UKKA)  and  the  British  Transplantation  Society  (BTS)  in  their  letter  dated  21 
December 2024, we comment as below: 

Contacting off-site specialists and sharing information 

• We  recommend  that  all  hospital  switchboards,  Emergency  Departments  and  relevant
personnel  have  a  master  copy  of  local  specialist  centre  contact  details  so  any  query  at  any
time can be appropriately directed.

Whilst this is a question that is best answered by our local non specialist hospitals, we are aware that 
both  South  Warwickshire  NHS  Foundation  Trust  and  George  Eliot  Hospital  switchboards  and  their 
Emergency Departments have local specialist centre contact details. 

• We  recommend  that  all  staff  are  advised  of  internal  escalation  routes.  Relevant  clinical
colleagues  should  be  aware  of  internal  escalation  routes  to  clarify  whether  off-site  specialist
input is required.  We would expect  this to be achieved  by  asking  the  Consultant  responsible
for the patient’s care or their deputy.

We confirm that staff at UHCW are aware of internal escalation routes.  The escalation of concerns is 
via  the  renal  registrar  and  renal  consultant.   We  confirm  that  UHCW  has  shared  and  agreed  with 
George Eliot Hospitals the indications for referral to us as a specialist unit, and the routes for referral. 

• We  advise  that  electronic information  sharing in  real-time  should  be  the  gold  standard for
information sharing. In the case of kidney patients, we would expect to be informed about all
patients  admitted  for  care  in  another  hospital  or  elsewhere  in  our  own  hospital  who  have
chronic kidney disease stage 5 (CKD G5) or who are receiving dialysis treatment or who have a
kidney transplant.

Chief Executive Officer:  

      Chair:  

 
 
 There is an established and effective process for referring patients who are receiving dialysis to their 
parent  unit.        UHCW  has  Service  Level  Agreements  with  George  Eliot  Hospital  and  with  South 
Warwickshire  Foundation  Trust  that  UHCW  will  provide  onsite  Renal  Consultant  Specialist  inpatient 
review at GEH and SWFT upon request up to twice a week.  Additionally, UHCW has worked with UK 
Kidney  Association  and  agreed  to  be  the  primary  specialist  transfer  centre  for  all  renal  transplant 
patients admitted from referring hospitals regardless of their parent specialist unit.  

Electronic patient sharing of blood test results in real-time exists for patients who are already known 
to UHCW  Renal  Department,  whether  admitted to GEH  or  SWFT.   In addition,  “referapatient.org”  is 
being  considered  as  a  means  of  recording  communication  between referring  centres  and  UHCW  in 
real time. 

•   We advise that Trusts review their processes to ensure that CMV results are available in a 
timely fashion. This involves considering the transport and turnaround of samples with prompt 
reporting in specialist virology laboratories as well as how to ensure that blood is taken in the 
correct blood tubes.  

Following  the  sad  death  of  Mr  Doyle,  UHCW  Renal  and  Virology  teams  have  reviewed  processes.  
Guidelines  have  been  developed  which  describe:  the  correct  blood  tubes,  how  to  ensure  urgent 
turnaround,  who  to  contact,  when,  and  how  to  escalate  to      These  have  been  shared  with  GEH. 
Turnaround times for all pathology labs are published in CWPS Handbook V16 May 2024.pdf.  

Accessibility to Renal Care Guidelines  

•   As access to Guidelines could lead to a misunderstanding of the significance and urgency 
of required actions; the critical action in this case would be to contact the Specialist Centre 

We agree with the UKKA and Royal College response.   

•      Whilst  we  acknowledge  that  being  well-informed  can  help  with  communication  and  care 
delivery,  in  this  case  we  would  advise  that  care  be  delivered  by  a  Specialist  who  should  not 
necessarily need to refer to the Guidelines.  

We agree the UKKA and Royal College response. In addition to our established process of contacting 
the specialist team by phone, reinstating the SLAs ensures that referring centres can ask for specialist 
consultant review onsite.  Both communications support early and appropriate treatment and transfer 
if needed. 

Transfer of responsibility, care coordination and decision-making for patient location  

•   We recommend that when a Specialist Team is managing the care of a particular condition 
at  a  distance  or  on-site,  they  assume  responsibility  for  recommending  the  best  location  for 
care  delivery.  This  may  require  careful  negotiation  in  cases  where  multiple  conditions  are 
being managed.  

We  accept  the  responsibility  for  recommending  best  location  for  all  patients  referred  to  Renal 
Services.  Based on  the clinical  requirements  patients  could be  transferred to  UHCW  or reviewed  by 
the UHCW renal consultant at the local hospital and transferred over later if necessary. 

•   We recommend that the responsible Specialist Team is from the local specialist renal centre 
rather  than  the  renal  centre  usually  caring  for  the  patient.  If  necessary,  local  specialists  can 
liaise directly with the relevant renal centre.  

Chief Executive Officer:  

      Chair:  

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 It is usually the case that a non-specialist hospital will contact the parent specialist hospital where that 
patient has been receiving their routine renal care.  However, as a result of this Regulation 28, UHCW 
will now be the primary specialist transfer centre for all renal patients admitted to peripheral hospitals 
regardless of their  parent  specialist  unit.    The agreed shared  guidelines  and SLA  will  ensure  closer 
working and improved patient care.  

Action points for the UKKA and BTS  

Each organisation is to take the following actions.  

1.  Share recommendations with the kidney care and transplant communities.  

2.  Contact  patient  associations  to  assist  with  considering  the  role  of  patients  and  their 
carers  in  highlighting  where  their  specialist  care  is  undertaken/provided  and  who  to 
contact.  

3. Share with the Royal College of Physicians Patient Safety Committee.  

We note that the 3 points above are for consideration of the UKKA and the BTS and therefore make 
no comment.  

Please do not hesitate to get in contact should any further information be required. 

Yours sincerely 

Chief Executive Officer 

Chief Executive Officer:  

      Chair:
Response from 2 From George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust (PDF)
NHS)

Our vision is to EXCEL at patient care George Eliot Hospital
; NHS Trust

George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust
College Street
Nuneaton
Warwickshire
CV10 7DJ
Your Ref.: 10718704
Our Ref.: RN/LJW — Doyle

5 February 2025
PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL

Ms L Lee

HM Assistant Coroner
Warwickshire Justice Centre
Newbold Terrace
Leamington Spa

CV32 4EL

Dear Ms Lee
RE: REGULATION 28 REPORT — JOHN DOYLE

Further to your e-mail dated the 9 January 2025, | am writing to confirm that the Trust has
considered the response from UK Kidney Association (UKKA) and the British Transplantation
Society (BTS) and we believe that the Trust had covered everything in our original response,
with 2 exceptions.

1. The first recommendation is ensuring switchboard have a master copy of local
specialist centre contact details and the Trust can confirm that this action has been
taken. . ie

3. This recommendation is about notifying UKKA of all patients with chronic kidney stage
5 (CDK G5) or who are receiving dialysis treatment or who have a kidney transplant.
University Hospitals of Coventry & Warwickshire update UKKA as the specialist centre
for this specialty.

The three action points at the end of the letter are for UKKA and BTS to undertake, however,
| confirm that the Trust has received and acknowledged them.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if | can be of further assistance.

Yours sincerely

Chief Medical Officer
Response from NHS England (PDF)
Ms Linda Lee 
Assistant Coroner for Coventry and Warwickshire 
Warwickshire Justice Centre 
Newbold Terrace 
Leamington Spa 
CV32 4EL 

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

7 January 2025 

Dear Coroner, 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – John Frederick Doyle 
who died on 30 December 2023.  

Thank  you  for  your  Report  to  Prevent  Future  Deaths  (hereafter  “Report”)  dated  12 
November 2024 concerning the death of John Frederick Doyle on 30 December 2023. 
In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like 
to express my deep condolences to John’s family and loved ones. NHS England are 
keen to assure the family and the Coroner that the concerns raised about John’s care 
have been listened to and reflected upon.   

Your report raises concerns about a lack of understanding and awareness from non-
specialist medical staff as to when and how to contact specialist renal hospitals. You 
have also raised concerns around coordination and consistency of care provided to 
patients as they are transferred from non-specialist hospitals to renal hospitals, as well 
as the information which is being provided to patients about their care and the options 
available.  

Renal services are covered by NHS specialised commissioning services. A specialist 
Clinical Reference Group have developed service specifications that clearly define the 
standards of care expected from organisations providing specialist care for patients 
who undergo kidney transplantation, as well as patients with acute kidney injuries or 
those undergoing dialysis. Further information can be found here: NHS commissioning 
» Renal services.  

Renal medicine is a specialist service that is delegated to individual Integrated Care 
Boards. My regional colleagues in the Midlands have been sighted on your Report, 
and have shared it with Coventry and Warwickshire ICB, for the appropriate oversight. 

Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) is a national NHS England programme designed 
to  improve  the  treatment  and  care  of  patients  through  in-depth  review  of  services, 
benchmarking, and presenting a data-driven evidence base to support change. The 
Renal  Medicine  GIRFT  also  highlights  the  importance  of  having  clear  pathways  in 
https://gettingitrightfirsttime.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Renal-
place: 
Medicine-Sept21k.pdf 

                                                                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
  
 I  note  that  your  Report  has  also  been  sent  to  University  Hospitals  Coventry  and 
Warwickshire NHS Trust (UHCW) and George Eliot Hospital NHS Trust (GEH). It is 
appropriate  that  the  providers  involved  in  John’s  care  respond  to  the  Coroner 
regarding the concerns raised which relate to local arrangements and process. NHS 
England has asked to be sighted on their responses and will consider these in due 
course  and  whether  any  further  actions  are  required  from  our  Specialised 
Commissioning Teams.  

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 John, 
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
Response from Ukka and Bts (PDF)
Brandon House, Building 20A1 
Southmead Road, Filton 
Bristol, BS34 7RR 
Tel: 0117 414 8152 
Email: ukka@ukkidney.org 

31st December 2024 

Mrs Linda Lee 
Assistant Coroner  
Warwickshire County Council  

Dear Mrs Lee, 

Re: Response to Regulation 28 Report to prevent future deaths following the inquest into the 
death of John Frederick Doyle. 

Following your email request received on 12th November 2024, the UK Kidney Association (UKKA; 
formerly the Renal Association) and the British Transplantation Society (BTS) have collaborated and 
produced the following recommendations in response to your concerns. 

Contacting off-site specialists and sharing information 

•  We recommend that all hospital switchboards, Emergency Departments and relevant 

personnel have a master copy of local specialist centre contact details so any query at any 
time can be appropriately directed. 

•  We recommend that all staff are advised of internal escalation routes. Relevant clinical 

colleagues should be aware of internal escalation routes to clarify whether off-site specialist 
input is required. We would expect this to be achieved by asking the Consultant responsible 
for the patient’s care or their deputy. 

•  We advise that electronic information sharing in real-time should be the gold standard for 
information sharing. In the case of kidney patients, we would expect to be informed about 
all patients admitted for care in another hospital or elsewhere in our own hospital who have 
chronic kidney disease stage 5 (CKD G5) or who are receiving dialysis treatment or who have 
a kidney transplant. 

•  We advise that Trusts review their processes to ensure that CMV results are available in a 
timely fashion. This involves considering the transport and turnaround of samples with 
prompt reporting in specialist virology laboratories as well as how to ensure that blood is 
taken in the correct blood tubes. 

Accessibility to Renal Care Guidelines 

•  As access to Guidelines could lead to a misunderstanding of the significance and urgency of 
required actions; the critical action in this case would be to contact the Specialist Centre. 
•  Whilst we acknowledge that being well-informed can help with communication and care 

delivery, in this case we would advise that care be delivered by a Specialist who should not 
necessarily need to refer to the Guidelines. 

Transfer of responsibility, care coordination and decision-making for patient location 

•  We recommend that when a Specialist Team is managing the care of a particular condition 
at a distance or on-site, they assume responsibility for recommending the best location for  

 
 
 
 
 care delivery. This may require careful negotiation in cases where multiple conditions are 
being managed.  

•  We recommend that the responsible Specialist Team is from the local specialist renal centre 
rather than the renal centre usually caring for the patient. If necessary, local specialists can 
liaise directly with the relevant renal centre.  

Action points for the UKKA and BTS 

Each organisation is to take the following actions. 

1.  Share recommendations with the kidney care and transplant communities. 
2.  Contact patient associations to assist with considering the role of patients and their carers in 

highlighting where their specialist care is undertaken/provided and who to contact. 

3.  Share with the Royal College of Physicians Patient Safety Committee. 

As the UKKA and BTS do not have responsibility for the care of patients with other conditions who 
will be similarly at risk, we recommend that the Coroner considers how to escalate issues of 
specialist care provision in hospitals at a national level. 

Yours sincerely, 

Co-Chair UKKA Kidney Patient Safety Committee  
Consultant Nephrologist Newcastle  

Co-Chair UKKA Kidney Patient Safety Committee  
Renal Consultant Nurse East Kent Hospitals University NHS Trust  

 on behalf of the British Transplantation Society  

Consultant Nephrologist, King’s College Hospital 

The UK Kidney Association (UKKA) is a trading name of the Renal Association, a registered charity (no 800733) and a 
company limited by guarantee, registered in England and Wales under company number 2229663.

Related reports

Other reports by Linda Lee

See all →

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

See all →

Track University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS 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.