Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2026

Alan Tomlinson

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2026-0131, written 6 Mar 2026. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report6 Mar 2026
Reference2026-0131
DeceasedAlan Tomlinson
CoronerMartin Lanchester
Coroner areaGwent
CategoryHospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths
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: 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 Chief Executive of Cardiff and Vale University Health Board

1

CORONER

I am Martin LANCHESTER, Assistant Coroner for the coroner area of Gwent

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.

3

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST

On 14 May 2024 I commenced an investigation into the death of Alan Bevis TOMLINSON
aged 55. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 24 February 2026.

Alan Tomlinson died on the 18 April 2024 at his home, from the effects of untreated
infective endocarditis likely caused by a longstanding soft tissue infection at the site of a
pacemaker implant which was implanted in May 2023.

Mr Tomlinson’s developing Infective Endocarditis was not identified by his treating general
practitioners and this was likely to have contributed to his death.

Mr Tomlinson’s pacemaker had been noted to be defective in January 2024 but he was not
referred to the Cardiology department at University of Wales Hospital and this also was
likely to have contributed to his death.

4

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH

On 16th April 2024 Alan Bevis TOMLINSON attended at the University Hospital (UHW)
Cardiff as he felt unwell and had swelling around the site of his pacemaker. Alan had been
unwell for several months and had suffered significant weight loss and was anaemic. Alan
had a new pacemaker fitted in May 2023 and he had not been well since this was changed.

On arrival at the UHW Alan was told that he had swelling around the site of his pacemaker
and needed to be admitted to a cardiac ward for further investigation and treatment. Alan
was advised to return to his home address as there was no cardiac bed available. Alan died
at his home address on the 18th April 2024.

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)

Mr Tomlinson had a history of heart valve surgery and was fitted with a new pacemaker in
May 2023. The device was reviewed periodically at the Cardiac Device Clinic at the

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

 University Hospital of Wales. In the months after implantation, the pacemaker showed
progressively increasing ventricular thresholds.
At his review on 8 January 2024, the threshold was 5.0 V @ 2 ms and the predicted battery
life had fallen to 10 months. Although he was well known to the physiologists and was
visibly unwell, with marked weight loss, no record was made of his clinical condition.
Evidence from a consultant cardiologist confirmed that the elevated threshold required
referral to the Cardiology Department, but no referral was made.
I found that the pacemaker itself did not cause Mr Tomlinson’s death from untreated
infective endocarditis. However, a timely referral to cardiology would probably have led to
earlier diagnosis, and the delay was likely to have contributed to his death.
Evidence from the Chief Physiologist identified wider concerns within the service, including:
Lack of guidance on when pacemaker data should trigger cardiology review;
1.
Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis;
2.
3.
Inconsistent gathering of clinical information and implant site checks during clinic
visits;
4.
Cardiology team.

How clinical findings were documented and communicated, particularly to the

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

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report,
namely by May 01, 2026. 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 the following Interested
Persons

Family Members And Next Of Kin

I have also sent it to

Not Applicable

who may find it useful or of interest.

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.
He may send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful or of
interest.

You may make representations to me, the coroner, at the time of your response about the
release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner.

9

Dated: 06/03/2026

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

 Martin LANCHESTER
Assistant Coroner for
Gwent

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

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 Cardiff and Vale University Health Board (PDF)
Woodland House 
Maes-y-Coed Road 
Cardiff   
CF14 4HH  

Ty Coedtir 
Ffordd Maes-y-Coed 
Caerdydd 
CF14 4HH 

29th April 2026 

Coroner: Mr Martin Lanchester, Assistant Coroner for Gwent        

Dear Mr Lanchester 

Thank you for your Regulation 28 Report of 6th March 2026, issued following the inquest into 
the death of Mr Alan Bevis Tomlinson. On behalf of Cardiff and Vale University Health Board, 
I wish to extend our sincere condolences to Mr Tomlinson’s family for their loss. We recognise 
the  purpose  of  your  report  is  to  prevent  future  deaths,  and  we  welcome  the  opportunity  to 
outline  the  actions  we  have  taken  and  those  we  will  be  taking  in  direct  response  to  the 
concerns you identified. 

1. Summary of the Concerns Raised 
We note and accept the concerns set out in your Report, including: 

•  Lack  of  clear  guidance  on  thresholds  or  criteria  for  referring  pacemaker  data  for 

cardiology review. 

•  Limited physiologist knowledge of infective endocarditis and its association with device 

• 

infections. 
Inconsistent  gathering  of  clinical  information  and  examination/documentation  of 
implant sites during clinic visits. 

•  Variability  in  communication  and  documentation  practices,  particularly  regarding 

escalation to the Cardiology team. 

We acknowledge the link you identified between the absence of timely referral and the delay 
in diagnosing Mr Tomlinson’s evolving infective endocarditis. 

Actions  
The Health Board takes these findings extremely seriously. In response, the following actions 
have already been implemented: 

Immediate Clinical Review and Strengthened Referral Criteria 

•  A revised escalation and referral protocol has been implemented within the Cardiac 

Device Clinic. 

•  A mandatory referral trigger is now in place if a device has lost a twofold safety margin. 
This  has  been  clearly  documented  in  the  “Managing  the  Unwell  Patient  Standard 
Operating Procedure” (attached) which is stored on the departmental SharePoint.  
•  The Standard Operating Procedure has been shared with all Physiologists and will be 

presented at the departmental Quality and Safety meeting on the 13th of May.  

Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Caerdydd a’r Fro yw enw gweithredol Bwyrdd Iechyd Lleol Prifysgol Caerdydd a’r Fro  
Cardiff and Vale University Health Board is the operational name of Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board  

  
 
 
 
 
                                                     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Enhanced Clinical Assessment Standards 
•  A new history sheet has been developed for the documentation of all clinical findings 

during Device Check clinic appointments. This requires. 

o  Documented assessment of the patient’s general condition, including the Red 
Flag  questions  of  any  significant  weight  loss,  any  fevers,  any  changes  to 
mobility, any difficulty with speech, and any breathing difficulties. 

o  Mandatory inspection of the device implantation site and recording if presence 

of any redness, swelling, heat, or threatened erosion. 

•  Monthly  notes  audits  will  be  conducted  for  the  quarter  following  presentation  of  the 

SOP on the 13th of May.  

Training and Education for Physiologists 

•  Training sessions have been arranged for delivery covering:  

o  Recognition of infective endocarditis, including atypical presentations, will be 

delivered by a Consultant Cardiologist 

o  Recognising the generally unwell patient and Red Flags which will be delivered 

by the Nursing Practice Educators 

o  When and how to escalate to a cardiologist has been circulated via e-mail and 

will be delivered on the 13th of May Quality and Safety afternoon.  

Strengthened Documentation and Communication Pathways 

•  All  clinic  entries  now  require  explicit  documentation  of  clinical  findings,  including 
implant site, any red flags and symptom information provided by the patient, as well as 
all device data and associated tests performed.  

•  The  development  of  specific  Cardiac  Physiology  inboxes  in  the  existing  e-Advice 

system.  

Development of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) 
We  have  finalised  a  comprehensive  SOP  for  device  the  escalation  of  the  unwell  patient, 
covering. 

Audit and Quality Assurance 

•  Audits of the following have been instigated:  
o  Notes Standards compliance 
o  E-Advice usage and response times  

Digital Support  
We  are  implementing  the  Fysicon  system,  which  is  an  electronic  patient  record.  This  will 
incorporate all clinical notes and will provide trend data to further enhance the clinical decision 
making and improve patient outcomes.  

Engagement With Staff and Wider Learning 
The findings of the inquest and your Regulation 28 report have been: 

•  Shared with the Cardiology Directorate, Clinical Board leadership, and Quality & Safety 

Committee. 

To  develop  these  service  improvements  benchmarking  exercises  were  conducted.  The 
development of the Red Flag questions is a change to practice in Wales. On discussion with 
our  colleagues  in  neighbouring  health  boards,  it  appears  the  undergraduate  Cardiac 
Physiology teaching on recognition of systemic illness in patients is limited. The questions in 
device clinics  remain  focused on  cardiology  specific  conditions,  such  as heart  failure.  As  a 
Health  Board,  we  recognise  that  this  would  be  too  limited  for  our  patient  cohort.  We  have, 
therefore, developed broader Red Flag questions and an associated training package.  

We recognise the seriousness of the failings identified and are committed to ensuring that the 
lessons from this tragic case led to sustained, measurable improvement in our services. We 

Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Caerdydd a’r Fro yw enw gweithredol Bwyrdd Iechyd Lleol Prifysgol Caerdydd a’r Fro  
Cardiff and Vale University Health Board is the operational name of Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board  

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 will continue to monitor compliance, strengthen training, and enhance our clinical pathways to 
prevent similar harm. 

Please be assured of our full cooperation and our commitment to implementing the actions 
outlined. Should you require any further information or clarification, we would, of course, be 
happy to provide this. 

Yours sincerely 

Chief Executive 

Enc Managing the Unwell Patient SOP 

Bwrdd Iechyd Prifysgol Caerdydd a’r Fro yw enw gweithredol Bwyrdd Iechyd Lleol Prifysgol Caerdydd a’r Fro  
Cardiff and Vale University Health Board is the operational name of Cardiff and Vale University Local Health Board

Related reports

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.