Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025

Lorraine Parker

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0194, written 23 Apr 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report23 Apr 2025
Reference2025-0194
DeceasedLorraine Parker
CoronerHeidi Connor
Coroner areaBerkshire
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published4

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

2

3

, President of the Association of Coloproctology of Great

Britian.

Medical Officer at the Department of Health and Social Care.

, acting CEO of the Royal College of Surgeons.

, National Director of Patient Safety and Deputy Chief

1

CORONER

I am HEIDI J CONNOR, Senior Coroner for Berkshire for the coroner area of Berkshire

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.

It is important to note the case of R (Dr Siddiqui and Dr Paeprer-Rohricht) v Assistant
Coroner for East London. This case clarifies that the issuing and receipt of a Regulation 28
report entails no more than the coroner bringing some information regarding a public safety
concern to the attention of the recipient. The report is not punitive in nature and engages
no civil or criminal right or obligation on the part of the recipient, other than the obligation
to respond to the report in writing within 56 days.

3

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

The family requested me to refer to the deceased as Lorraine. I will reflect that in this
report. I conducted an inquest into the death of Lorraine Sandra Parker which concluded on
3rd April 2025. She was 52, and died on 30th March 2024. I recorded a narrative conclusion
as follows:

Natural causes, contributed to by cancer, by necessary surgical treatment, and by delay in
diagnosing and managing anastomotic leak, after surgery conducted on 23rd of January
2024.

4

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

This can be summarised by my findings on the Record of Inquest as follows:

Lorraine Parker had an operation for sigmoid colon cancer on 23rd of January 2024.
Although there was some improvement in the patient’s clinical condition, there was a delay
in investigating clinical signs and blood markers, specifically CRP results, from 27th of
January 2024. Lorraine was discharged home on 31st of January 2024 with no post-
operative scan and a CRP of 173. The CRP result had been increasing over the past three
days before her discharge.

On return to hospital on the 1st of February, her CRP had continued to rise and a CT scan
was carried out. The scan was misreported as showing no anastomotic leak. It was only
when faeces began to leak from her wound that the scan was re-reviewed and noted to
show anastomotic leak. She was initially managed conservatively, but was then returned to
theatre. Her descending colon was noted to be disintegrated.

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

 Lorraine was managed on the intensive care unit between 5th and 14th of February, and on
a ward thereafter before being discharged home on 23rd of February. She was re-admitted
to hospital between 12th and 15th of March, when a drain was inserted to remove a pelvic
collection.

When attending a routine wound review appointment on 30th of March 2024, Lorraine
became suddenly unwell. The crash team attended and resuscitation efforts were carried
out, but she died that day, at Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading in Berkshire.

Her cause of death was:

1a Pulmonary embolism
1b Deep Vein Thrombosis
2 Sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma (operated January 2024)

I concluded that delay in diagnosing and managing anastomotic leak contributed to her
death.

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.

It is clearly the case that clinical judgment is the most important factor in deciding
when a patient who has undergone major abdominal surgery requires a CT scan.
Surgeons will “treat the patient, not the numbers”.

2. There is currently no guidance which requires surgeons to consider scanning for

patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery and whose CRP is high and
not decreasing, as was the case here at the time Lorraine was discharged from
hospital on 31st January 2024.

3. There may be some difficulty in creating a hard line requirement for CT scanning
based on a particular CRP result, but I am concerned that there is no guidance in
place for requiring a consultant to consider this – perhaps when the CRP is above a
certain figure and either not decreasing or continuing to rise. Any such guidance
could still allow for clinical judgement – and documenting of the reasons for that
decision.
It is my experience that clinical judgement alone, particularly where a patient looks
well “from the end of the bed” is not always sufficient in this scenario. I have seen a
number of avoidable death cases in this context. The purpose of blood test results
is to flag up objective areas of concern. There is much reference to chasing up CRP
results in Lorraine’s records, but these do not appear to have been taken into
account at the time that she was discharged from the hospital without a post-
operative scan.

4.

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

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

 You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by June 19th, 2025. 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 Lorraine’s family.

I have also sent this report to the following recipients, who may have an interest in this
matter:

1. Legal representative for Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust.
2.

, consultant colorectal surgeon (who acted as independent expert

in this case).

For the avoidance of doubt, the 2 recipients referred to in this paragraph have been copied
in out of interest and are not expected to send a formal response.

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of the response of the three
recipients mentioned at the top of this letter.

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.
She may send a copy of this report to any person who she 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: 23/04/2025

HEIDI J CONNOR
Senior Coroner for Berkshire for
Berkshire

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

Responses

4 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 Dhsc (PDF)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State  
for Public Health and Prevention  

39 Victoria Street  
London  
SW1H 0EU  

18 June 2025  

Our ref: 

HM Coroner Heidi J Connor  
Coroner’s Office  
Reading Town Hall  
Blagrave Street  
Reading   
RG1 1QH  

By email: 

Dear Ms Connor,   

Thank you for the Regulation 28 report of 23rd April 2025 sent to the Department of Health 
and  Social  Care  about  the  death  of  Lorraine  Parker.  I  am  replying  as  the  Minister  with 
responsibility for cancer policy.        

Firstly, I would like to say how saddened I was to read of the circumstances of Ms Parker’s 
death, and I offer my sincere condolences to her family and loved ones. The circumstances 
your report describes are concerning and I am grateful to you for bringing these matters to 
my attention.  

The report raises concerns over the lack of formal guidance requiring consultant surgeons 
to  consider  CT  scanning  for  post-operative  patients  with  persistently  high  or  rising  CRP 
levels,  and  an  over-reliance  on  clinical  judgement  without  sufficient  consideration  of 
objective markers such as CRP. It also notes the absence of clear documentation around 
decisions to use, or not use, imaging in these scenarios, and raised a broader concern that 
apparent clinical improvement at the bedside may mask serious post-surgical complications 
that could only be identified through appropriate imaging.  

In  preparing  this  response,  my  officials  have  made  enquiries  with  colleagues  across  the 
health system, including the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the 
Care Quality Commission (CQC) and multiple teams across the Department of Health and 
Social Care to ensure we adequately address your concerns.  

In this case, there was not one single error but multiple errors that contributed to the death 
of Ms Parker.   

Lord Darzi’s independent report on the state of the NHS highlighted the challenges facing 
our health service, which is why we have launched: 

•  a 10-Year Health Plan to reform the NHS and make it fit for the future  

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   
   
   
   
 
 •  a refreshed workforce plan to ensure the NHS has the right people in the right 

places with the right skills to deliver the care patients need   

•  a National Cancer Plan for England to reduce the number of lives lost to cancer 

and improve patient experiences and outcomes.  

With  regard  to  concerns  about  guidance  for  clinicians,  the  NICE  guideline  on  colorectal 
cancer (NG151) aims to improve quality of life and survival for adults with colorectal cancer 
by providing evidence-based recommendations on the management of both local disease 
and metastatic (secondary) cancer. It covers which interventions should be used for different 
types and stages of the disease, helping to guide decisions on surgery, chemotherapy, and 
other treatments.  

The NICE guideline does not provide detailed protocols for postoperative tests or scans, and 
clinicians  would  be  expected  to  use  their  judgement  and  follow  local  protocols  or  other 
relevant professional guidance. However, whilst the Department has no immediate plans to 
instruct  NICE  to  produce  standalone  guidance  on  post-surgery  imaging  based  on  CRP 
thresholds,  details  of  this  case  have  been  shared  with  colleagues  in  NICE’s  prioritisation 
team to consider if further action should be taken.  

With regard to concerns about clinical judgement, NHS Trusts are responsible for ensuring 
staff  are  sufficiently  competent  to  deliver  care. Accordingly,  the  Trust  in  question  should 
consider their protocols in the wake of this case. The CQC has passed details of the case 
to the relevant inspection team for Royal Berkshire Hospital for further consideration.  

I hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing these concerns to my attention.    

Yours sincerely,
Response from NHS England (PDF)
Ms Heidi J Connor  
HM Senior Coroner  
Berkshire Coroner’s Office 
Reading Town Hall  
Blagrave Street  
Reading 
RG1 1QH  

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

13 June 2025   

Dear Coroner, 

Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Lorraine Sandra Parker 
who died on 30 March 2024  

Thank you for your Report to Prevent Future Deaths (hereafter “Report”) dated 23 April 
2025 concerning the death of Lorraine Sandra Parker on 30 March 2024. Whilst NHS 
England  is  not  specifically  named  as  a  respondent  in  your  Report,  the  Report  was 
 the National Director of Patient Safety 
addressed to my colleague 
for NHS England, (and a Deputy Chief Medical Officer at the Department of Health 
and Social Care (DHSC)). 

I  am  therefore  responding  to  you  in  my  capacity  as  Co-National  Medical  Director 
(Secondary Care) for NHS England, with responsibility for all Regulation 28 Reports 
addressed to the organisation, and would like to assure you that Dr Fowler has been 
sighted  on  your  Report  and  has  provided  input  into  this  response.  In  advance  of 
responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like to express my 
deep  condolences  to  Lorraine’s  family  and  loved  ones.  NHS  England  are  keen  to 
assure the family and the Coroner that the concerns raised about Lorraine’s care have 
been listened to and reflected upon.   

Your Report raises the concern that there is a lack of guidance for surgeons regarding 
CT scanning for patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery and where 
they have a raised C-reactive protein (CRP), which is either continuing to rise or is not 
decreasing.  You  raise  that  clinical  judgement  alone  is  not  always  sufficient  in  this 
scenario.  

While  NHS  England  notes  your  concerns,  clinical  guidelines  are  primarily  the 
responsibility of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the 
appropriate  Royal  Colleges.  NHS  Trusts  are  expected  to  have  due  regard  to  any 
clinical guidelines and to implement the appropriate local processes and/or guidance. 
I note that you have also addressed your Report to the Association of Coloproctology 
of  Great  Britain  (ACPGBI)  and  the  Royal  College  of  Surgeons,  who  are  the  more 
appropriate organisations to respond to your concerns.  

NHS England has however discussed your Report with the ACPGBI, and it is agreed 
that  there  is  not  a  requirement  for  further  guidance  to  be  written.  CRP  levels  are 

                                                                                                                       
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 commonly  used  as  a  marker  to  indicate  or  exclude  evidence  of  leaks,  including 
anastomotic leaks following abdominal surgery.  

The following articles and guidance are relevant and may assist the Coroner further: 

•  ACPGBI  Guidance  on  Prevention,  Diagnosis  and  Management  of  Colorectal 

Anastomotic Leakage – March 2016. 

•  National  Library  of  Medicine  article:  ‘Serum  C-reactive  protein  is  a  useful 
marker  to  exclude  anastomotic  leakage  after  colorectal  surgery’  dated  3 
February 2020. 
‘Early warning model to detect anastomotic leakage following colon surgery: a 
clinical observational study’ dated 8 October 2024. 

• 

NHS England notes the local delays in reporting experienced by Lorraine, who was 
sent  home  on  31  January  2024  without  a  post-operative  scan  despite  an  elevated 
CRP, together with the misreporting of the CT scan in February 2024. Clinical Quality 
colleagues in the South East region have been made aware of your Report and asked 
to engage with the relevant Integrated Care Board / Trust on the details of Lorraine’s 
case and to seek assurance that learnings have been taken.  

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 
Lorraine, 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,  

Co-National Medical Director 
(Secondary Care)
Response from Royal College of Surgeons (PDF)
(a Royal College
rit of Surgeons
ae KN of England

tet. sea ae ADVANCING SURGICAL CARE
BY EMAIL

Heidi J Connor
Senior Coroner for Berkshire

3 June 2025

Dear Madam Coroner,

Thank you for providing RCS England with details in your recent issuance of a Regulation 28:
Report to Prevent Future Deaths. The Chief Executive has passed this notice to me as the Vice-
President responsible for patient safety.

We are extremely sorry to hear of the death of Lorraine Parker and express our sincere
condolences to her family.

We take note of the cautionary points made within the report, specifically, the need to take note
of increasing CRP following sigmoid colectomy and bowel anastomosis for adenocarcinoma,
and the failure, in this case, to act on this to obtain appropriate imaging in a timely manner.

Deterioration of the surgical patient following bowel surgery, and appropriate perioperative care,
is covered in the postgraduate training surgical curriculum in the Intercollegiate Surgical
Curriculum Programme (often referred to as ‘ISCP’). We note that the Association of
Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) has been informed of the report and they
are best placed to consider the need for guidance. We will contact them to support their
assessment and any dissemination of guidance or other communications.

We will ensure that a precautionary anonymised educational surgical vignette relating to this
death is included in the Confidential Reporting System for Surgery (CORESS) surgical safety
feedback reports published in the journals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England and
circulated to our members. We will also encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh
to do the same.

Thank you for drawing our attention to this unfortunate case.

Yours Sincerely,

VicePresident 7

Registered Charity no: 212808
Response from The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (PDF)
5 June 2025 

Heidi J Connor 

Senior Coroner for Berkshire 

Reading Museum and Town Hall 

Blagrave Street 

Reading  

RG1 1QH 

Dear Ms Connor, 

Thank you for your correspondence dated 23 April 2025 in the form of Regulation 28: Report to Prevent 
Future  Deaths.  I  am  writing  on  behalf  of  the  ACPGBI  Executive  Committee,  which  I  currently  Chair  as 
President. 

The report has been scrutinised by me and discussed by the Executive Committee on 2 June 2025. 

In  relation  to  the  matters  of  concern  raised,  I  attach  Issues  in  Professional  Practice  Guidance  on  the 
Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leak, produced in collaboration with 
ACPGBI. Although published in 2016, the guidance around post-operative CRP monitoring and triggering 
subsequent radiological investigation remains as pertinent to clinical practice now as it was then. Please 
see  in  particular  pages  16-17,  where  cut  off  values  for  CRP  triggering  a  subsequent  CT  scan  are  also 
considered.  In  addition,  there  have  been  several  subsequent  publications  (available  on  Pubmed) 
confirming this practice. 

On this basis, given current guidance exists, it is the view of the ACPGBI Executive that further additional 
guidance from ACPGBI is not required at this time. It is not clear to the Executive whether this existing 
guidance was considered during the investigative process outlined. 

Yours sincerely, 

President, ACPGBI 

www.acpgbi.org.uk 
The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland 
Royal College of Surgeons of England / 35-43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields / London WC2A 3PE / Telephone: +44 (0)20 7973 0307 / +44 (0)20 7973 0373 

Registered Charity 1118063 A company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales Company reg. no. 5962281 

Email: admin@acpgbi.org.uk 

The Association of Coloproctologyof Great Britain and Ireland

Related reports

Other reports by Heidi Connor

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.