Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025
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 report | 23 Apr 2025 |
|---|---|
| Reference | 2025-0194 |
| Deceased | Lorraine Parker |
| Coroner | Heidi Connor |
| Coroner area | Berkshire |
| Category | Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths |
| Source | judiciary.uk record · original PDF |
| Responses published | 4 |
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
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.
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,
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)
(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
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
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.