Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025

Mary Fitzpatrick

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2025-0435, written 20 Aug 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report20 Aug 2025
Reference2025-0435
DeceasedMary Fitzpatrick
CoronerMary Hassell
Coroner areaInner North London
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
Organisation namedWhittington Health NHS Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses published1

The report

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

Regulation 28:  Prevention of Future Deaths report 

Mary Anne FITZPATRICK (died 20.03.25) 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1.  Chief Executive 

Whittington Health NHS Trust 
Whittington Hospital 
Magdala Avenue 
London  N19 5NF 

1 

CORONER 

I am:   Coroner ME Hassell 
           Senior Coroner  
           Inner North London 
           St Pancras Coroner’s Court 
           Poplar Coroner’s Court 
           Bow Coroner’s Court 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009,  
paragraph 7, Schedule 5, and  
The Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013, 
regulations 28 and 29. 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On  26  March  2025,  one  of  my  assistant  coroners,  Harry  Lambert, 
commenced an investigation into the death of Mary Fitzpatrick aged 86 
years. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest yesterday. I 
made a narrative determination at inquest, which I attach. 

Mrs Fitzpatrick’s medical cause of death was: 

1a 
1b 
1c 
2 

aspiration pneumonia 
dysphagia  
frailty  
sacral pressure sore  

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Mrs  Fitzpatrick  was  discharged  from  the  Whittington  Hospital  on  29 
January  2025  and  was  then  treated  by  the  Islington  Central  district 
nursing team from Whittington Health.   

Her sacral pressure sore was assessed as a category 2 on 1 February.  
By 24 February it was a category 4 – a gaping, open wound.  It forced 
her  readmission  to  hospital  on  27  February,  at  which  point  she 
deconditioned and then died. 

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 will occur 
unless  action  is  taken.  In  the  circumstances,  it  is  my  statutory  duty  to 
report to you. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.  

As you will see  from the Record of Inquest attached, I made a finding 
that death would not have occurred when it did, had it not been for the 
23 January admission to hospital, the development of the pressure sore, 
and the failure properly to treat that pressure sore.   

1.  It  is  well  recognised  that  the  admission  of  an  elderly  person  to 
hospital  can  be  risky  and  should  only  be  undertaken  if  really 
necessary.    These  days,  a  long  wait  on  a  hospital  trolley  is 
predictable.    Even  without  that,  the  elderly  are  known  often  to 
decondition quickly. 

At inquest I accepted the evidence of Mrs Fitzpatrick’s family that 
the reality of her admission to the Whittington on 23 January 2025 
was  that  it  was  undertaken  because  there  was  only  one  nurse 
attending her on that day and this nurse felt she could not transfer 
this small, elderly lady alone with the aids that were available.  

2.  The  district  nurses  did  not  visit  to  dress  the  sacral  wound  with 
appropriate frequency.  Sometimes they attended as planned, but 
sometimes they did not attend and sometimes they attended but 
did not change the sacral dressing.  It remains unclear to me why 
that was so.  The only explanation I was given was that they were 
probably “thin on the ground”. 

3.  When I took evidence from the deputy manager of the Islington 
Central district nursing team, I was very forcibly struck by the lack 
of reflection undertaken since Mrs Fitzpatrick’s death, about the 
district  nursing  care,  even  when  preparing  to  give  evidence  at 
inquest.   

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The deputy manager was poorly prepared for inquest, appeared 
to have an inadequate understanding of what was required of her 
giving  evidence,  had  not  acquainted  herself  with  some  basic 
elements  of  the  medical  records  and,  whilst  in  the  witness  box, 
changed her mind about what home visits had been undertaken 
depending upon who asked her the question.   

She  steadfastly  refused  to  acknowledge  gaps  in  care  despite 
glaring evidence to the contrary, and when this was brought to her 
attention she simply stopped answering.   

It is difficult to see how a trust can learn and improve care if there 
is no serious consideration of why there was a poor outcome.   

Even  the  letter  of  apology  sent  to  Mrs  Fitzpatrick’s  family  was 
offered  to  her  daughter  in  an  offhand  way  during  a  very  short 
telephone  call.    When  giving  evidence,  the  deputy  manager 
seemed  to  be  in  difficulty  understanding  what  an  apology  is, 
naming this a letter of apology but in essence describing a letter 
of sympathy, emphasising that  it was not an admission that the 
trust  had  done  anything  wrong.    I  still  do  not  have  a  proper 
understanding of what such a letter was meant to achieve.  Much 
more importantly, it seemed to me that Mrs Fitzpatrick’s family do 
not have a proper understanding of what this letter was meant to 
achieve.  They did not seem comforted by it.   

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In  my  opinion,  action  should  be  taken  to  prevent  future  deaths  and  I 
believe that 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 20 October 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. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the following. 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •  The daughter of Mary Fitzpatrick 
•  Care Quality Commission for England  
•  HHJ Alexia Durran, the Chief Coroner of England & Wales 

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  other  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. 

9 

DATE                                                  SIGNED BY SENIOR CORONER 

20.08.25                                              ME Hassell 

4
Also filed under 2025-0435: Record-of-inquest-Mary-Fitzpatrick.pdf
Record of Inquest 

Following  an  inquest  opened  on 27  March  2025  and  an  inquest  hearing  at St  Pancras  Coroner's  Court  on 
the Nineteenth of August 2025, heard before Coroner IE Potter in the area of HM Coroner for Inner North London, the 
following is the record of the inquest (including the statutory determination and, where required, findings). 

1.  Name of deceased (if known): 

            Mary Anne FITZPATRICK    

2.  Medical cause of death: 

      1a    aspiration pneumonia         
      1b    dysphagia         
      1c    frailty         
      1d              
       2     sacral pressure sore 

3.  How, when, where and, for investigations where section 5(2) of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 applies in 

what circumstances, the deceased came by his or her death (see note (ii)): 

        4.  Conclusions of HM Coroner or the jury as to the death (see notes (i) and (ii)): 

             Mary Fitzpatrick was sent to a hospital emergency department on 23 January 2025 not 
for any medical indication, but because a district nurse did not have a colleague to assist with 
wheelchair  to  bed  transfer  and  believed  that  she  could  not  manage  her  patient's  transfer 
alone, though solo transfer had been effected several times before.  Mrs Fitzpatrick waited on 
a hospital trolley for some hours for treatment and a sacral pressure sore developed. She was 
2025.  
discharged 
On  1  February  2025,  the  sacral  pressure  sore  was  noted  to  be  a  category  2.   The  district 
nursing service failed to attend her to change the dressing with appropriate frequency and, by 
24 February the sore had deteriorated to a category 4.  As a consequence, Mrs Fitzpatrick had 
to be re-admitted to hospital on 27 February, where she deconditioned and eventually died on 
2025.  
20 
Death was the result of natural causes.  However, it would not have occurred when it did, had 
it not been for the 23 January admission to hospital, the development of the sacral pressure 
sore, and the failure appropriately to treat that pressure sore. 

January 

March 

home 

on 

29 

5.  Further particulars required by the Births and Deaths Registration Act 1953 to be registered concerning the 

death:  
 (a)  Date and place of birth 
         Second of December 1938  
         Dublin, Ireland 
 (b)  Name and surname of deceased 
         Mary Anne FITZPATRICK 
 (c)  Sex 
         Female 
 (e)  Date and place of death 
        Twentieth of March 2025 
        University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, Bloomsbury, London 
 (f)  Occupation and usual address 
        carer (retired) widow of John Patrick Fitzpatrick, Butcher 
        Flat 1, Forrest Court, 4 Ellington Street, London 

 (d) Maiden surname of woman who has married 
       Rooney 

 
            
  
  
   Signature of Coroner ME Hassell, HM Senior Coroner

Responses

1 response published against this report on judiciary.uk. A response is a body's written reply to the coroner's concerns; publication is at the discretion of the Chief Coroner's office, so an absent response does not mean nobody replied.

Response from Whittington Health NHS Trust (PDF)
Chief Medical Officer 
Deputy Chief Executive 
Medical Directorate 
Jenner Building 
Magdala Avenue 
London N19 5NF 

20/10/25 

To: 
Senior Coroner ME Hassell 
Inner North London Coroner’s Court 

Response to Regulation 28: Prevention of Future Deaths Report 

Re: Mary Anne Fitzpatrick (died 20 March 2025) 

Dear Senior Coroner Hassell, 

Thank you for your Regulation 28 report dated 20 August 2025 concerning the very 
sad death of Mrs Mary Fitzpatrick. On behalf of Whittington Health NHS Trust, I wish 
again to express our condolences to her family. 

We take the concerns you have raised extremely seriously. This response sets out 
the actions we have already taken and those we are committed to undertaking to 
ensure learning, improvement, and prevention of similar future deaths. 

1. Circumstances of Hospital Admission and Risk of Deconditioning 

We recognise the risks associated with hospital admission for frail elderly patients, 
particularly where transfer occurs due to staffing limitations in community settings. 

We accept that in this instance, the care of Mrs Fitzpatrick fell short in a number of 
ways. 

Whittington Health NHS Trust 

Helping local people live longer healthier lives 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 •  Missed leg ulcer management: On the balance of 

probabilities, the deterioration of her leg ulcers was linked to the lack of 
treatment following the cancellations of scheduled appointments on 18, 20, 
21, and 22 January 2025. As there was no evidence of mental impairment at 
that time, a mental capacity assessment was not carried out with regards to 
the decision to cancel visits, and she was presumed to have capacity. 

•  Time in the Emergency Department: Mrs Fitzpatrick spent 40 hours in the 

Emergency Department, due to the department being under extreme 
pressure. some of this time in a temporary escalation space. We accept this 
falls short of the standard of care we would aspire to provide. Mrs Fitzpatrick 
arrived in Triage at 20:27. She was then transferred to a trolley and initially 
cared for in a temporary escalation space. While we work to avoid care in 
temporary escalation spaces, we have a standard operating procedure to set 
out the care which should carry on in non-clinical areas when necessary. At 
23.45 Mrs Fitzpatrick was moved into a cubicle in the Majors area. She was 
transferred to a bed at 03:33 on 24/01/25.  She was placed on a standard 
foam pressure relieving mattress at this time. When she was moved to the 
ward she was placed on a pneumatic pressure relieving mattress.   

•  Pressure sore identification and management: Her pressure areas were 
reviewed and documented within 2 hours of arrival and this identified her 
pressure sore. She was subsequently admitted and had further reviews, and  
the correct equipment and care plans were instituted. 

•  Risk factors: The risk of pressure sores was increased due to Mrs 

Fitzpatrick’s frailty and incontinence. We regret that she developed additional 
grade 2 sores during her hospital admission. 

Action Plan: 

A Quality improvement Project is in progress in our ED to monitor adherence to 
Pressure Ulcer Prevention and Management Policy as ED acknowledge that elderly 
patients spend longer in ED due to the complexity of their care. The standard is that 
all at risk patients will have their pressure areas reviewed within one hour of 
admission, and that prevention management will be instituted within four hours. The 
project is carrying out spot check audits of a 10-point check list for 10 patients per 
week. The results will be presented to will be presented Emergency and Integrated 
Medicine Quality Committee on 20th November 2025. 

Our Trust Policy governing care in temporary escalation spaces has been appended 
for reference.  

Whittington Health NHS Trust 

Helping local people live longer healthier lives 

 
 
 
 
 
 2. Frequency and Quality of District Nursing Visits 

We acknowledge the coroner’s concern regarding the frequency and 
appropriateness of district nursing visits and dressing changes. A review of Mrs 
Fitzpatrick’s records has allowed us to reconstruct the chronology of community 
nursing input following her hospital discharge: 

•  There were 2 missed opportunities for dressing changes on 5 February (visit 
not allocated) and 10 February (Mrs Fitzpatrick declined to be moved by the 
two staff members attending so dressings were not completed). 

•  Despite these missed visits, there was regular documentation of wound 

progression, escalation to the GP, referral to Tissue Viability, and repeated 
advice regarding hospital admission.  

•  When the pressure ulcers were found to have deteriorated. A Safeguarding 
Alert was raised as the pressure relieving mattress had been found to be 
switched off with no explanation on 24 February 2025. 

•  Staffing during this period was affected by long-term sickness (1 staff member 
>4 months) and annual leave (2 staff members). However agency and bank 
nurses were used to maintain service cover, and a bank nurse undertook the 
joint visit on 8 February. 

•  Double-handed visits were provided where identified as necessary from 7 

February onwards. 

•  We apologise that this information was not fully accessible to the coroner 

during the inquest  

Action Plan: 

•  Ensure daily visits allocations are individualised to meet the patients’ Pressure 
Ulcer (PU) management need by the duty manager, with monthly oversight 
from Service Lead. 

•  Timely referral to Tissue Viability Nurse (TVN), adherence with TVN 
recommendations, and progression of pressure ulcer management 
improvement plan are to be built into new quarterly audit cycle, and reviewed 
at divisional quality meeting. 

•  Shared learning from PU incidents will be ensured via weekly divisional 

pressure ulcer shared learning meetings.  

Whittington Health NHS Trust 

Helping local people live longer healthier lives 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •  A trial of visit allocation software (Docabode) is in 

progress in the Urgent response team and is intended to minimise travel time 
and maximise time for visits. If successful it will be trialled in District Nursing  

3. Reflection, Learning, and Preparation for Inquests 

We acknowledge the coroner’s concern that there was insufficient reflection on the 
quality of district nursing care provided to Mrs Fitzpatrick, both during her 
deterioration and in preparation for the inquest. We accept that the deputy manager 
who attended court was not adequately prepared to give evidence, which fell below 
the expected standard.  

We also recognise that our communication with Mrs Fitzpatrick’s family—both in 
person and in writing—did not provide the clarity, explanation, or candour they 
deserved, and that this contributed to their distress. 

Action Plan: 

Mortality review process: Current mortality review processes are largely designed 
to cover inpatients. New procedures are being devised to ensure all patient deaths 
under our care in the community services we run are formally reviewed for learning.  

Learning from Death: incidents and feedback, inquest outcomes and PFD notices 
will continue to be shared with staff at meetings. In addition, they will also be 
cascaded to all staff working in community services. 

Increase in support and training for staff involved in writing statements and 
attending the coroner’s court: This will also include advice to ensure that staff will 
not only cover the care that was delivered by themselves, but provide an overarching 
statement covering the care delivered as a whole by the Trust. Support will be given 
by the legal services team. The Trust is reviewing the seniority of staff attending 
coroner’s court to provide the court with the most useful and informative evidence. In 
addition to this, new guidance for staff preparing for inquests will be circulated by the 
Associate Medical Director for learning from deaths, in coordination with the legal 
department. 

New proforma: A new Duty of Candour proforma has been developed to accurately 
capture both professional and written Duty of Candour, ensuring documentation is 
clear and complete. This will better enable tracking and audit of statutory duty of 
candour across the trust. We expect to have this completed by December 2025, with 
the results presented to the Quality Governance Committee. 

Whittington Health NHS Trust 

Helping local people live longer healthier lives 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 Duty of Candour audit and training: Ongoing audit and 
refresher training are being introduced to strengthen understanding of and 
compliance with Duty of Candour. Levels of completion of training will be monitored 
by the patient safety team, and the results presented to the Quality Governance 
Committee quarterly. 

Chief Medical Officer  

Whittington Health NHS Trust 

Helping local people live longer healthier lives

Related reports

Other reports by Mary Hassell

See all →

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

See all →

Track Whittington Health NHS Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Whittington Health 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.