Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2025

Walter Pollyn

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2026-0134, written 16 Dec 2025. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report16 Dec 2025
Reference2026-0134
DeceasedWalter Pollyn
CoronerIan Potter
Coroner areaKent and Medway
CategoryCommunity health care and emergency services related deaths
Organisation namedMedway NHS Foundation 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.

Kent and Medway Coroners' Service 
Oakwood House 
Oakwood Park 
Maidstone 
Kent 
ME16 8AE 

Date: 16 December 2025 

REGULATION 28 REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO:  The Chief Executive, Medway NHS Foundation Trust 
1. CORONER 

I am Mr. Ian Potter, Area Coroner for Kent and Medway  

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. 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/25/schedule/5/paragraph/7 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1629/part/7/made 

3. INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 3 September 2024 an investigation was commenced into the death of Walter Perekuno 
POLLYN, aged 67 years at the time of his death on 16 August 2024. The investigation 
concluded at the end of the inquest, heard by me on 16 December 2025. The conclusion of 
the inquest was 

Natural causes 

1a   Pneumonia 

1b   Polymyositis 

1c    

1d     

 II     

4. CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

Walter Pollyn was admitted to Medway Maritime Hospital on 19 July 2024 following an 

  
   
 
  
  
  
  
 unwitnessed fall and increased confusion. On admission, he tested positive for Covid-19 and 
was placed on oxygen therapy due to respiratory complications. 

Following a Speech and Language Therapy (SALT) assessment, Mr Pollyn was made 'nil by 
mouth' (NBM) due to oropharyngeal dysphagia. The advice of the SALT team was not 
followed and water was repeatedly left within Mr Pollyn's reach. On 24 July 2024, Mr Pollyn 
drank half a glass of water, despite being NBM. Mr Pollyn aspirated the water which did not 
assist his overall condition. On the afternoon of 24 July 2024, Mr Pollyn's condition 
deteriorated further and he was intubated following his transfer to ITU. 

On 14 August 2024, following discussions with Mr Pollyn's family, he was place on an end of 
life care pathway. Sadly, Mr Pollyn in hospital on 16 August 2024.  

The immediate cause of Mr Pollyn's death was pneumonia, which was multifactorial. Those 
factors included aspiration pneumonia. It is not possible to quantify to what extent each factor 
contributed to Mr Pollyn's death. Nonetheless, Mr Pollyn should not have been in the situation 
(on 24 July 2024) where he was able to consume half a glass of water unsupervised, which 
was not in line with the Trust's policy. 

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. 

I wish to acknowledge that the Trust's After Action Review (AAR) highlighted a number of 
matters and there was evidence at the inquest that the Trust has addressed some of those 
matters. 

The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows.  - 

(1) Having been made 'nil by mouth', the evidence was that this was well documented in Mr 
Pollyn's records, a sign indicating that he was nil by mouth was placed above his bed, and the 
board within the ward kitchen was also updated. Despite this, the records indicate that 
numerous members of nursing staff ensured that water was placed at Mr Pollyn's bedside 
(which would be standard practice were Mr Pollyn not 'nil by mouth' at the time). While the 
Trust has updated the relevant policies and sought to disseminate messaging to staff in this 
regard, I was not reassured that this is solely a matter of policy. The number of staff involved 
and the period of time over which the issue of unsupervised access to water persisted is 
potentially suggestive of underlying attitudinal issues. 

(2) Following on from the above, I heard in evidence that the production of some patient 
records is a simple tick-box exercise, which is not a concern in itself. However, the impression 
created by the evidence was that staff members were ticking the box to indicate that water 
was placed/replaced at the bedside (and following through on that action) because that was 
the norm for most patients on the ward. This indicates that staff missed the entries in the notes 
about 'nil by mouth' and the other visual cues that were clear. While I heard that the Trust 
intends to undertake a review of record keeping, which may not be completed until March 
2026, I was given insufficient reassurance that this specific concern is being addressed. 

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 1st May 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. 

8. COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I have sent a copy of my report to the Chief Coroner and to the following Interested Persons: 
Mr Pollyn's family. 

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response. 

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. 

16 December 2025 

Signature 

Ian Potter, Area Coroner for Kent and Medway

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 Medway NHS Foundation Trust (PDF)
Medway Maritime Hospital 
Windmill Road 
Gillingham 
Kent 
ME7 5NY 

1 May 2026 

Mr Ian Potter 
Area Coroner 
Kent and Medway Coroner’s Court 
Oakwood House 
Oakwood Road 
Maidstone 
ME16 8AE 

Dear Sir, 

Re: Inquest touching on the death of Walter Pollyn - Prevention of Future 
Deaths Regulation report 

We refer to your Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report dated 16 December 2026, 
which was sent to the Trust on 6 March 2026, and our response to which is due on 1 
May 2026. 

In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in the PFD report, I would 
like to express my deep condolences to Mr. Pollyn’s family. On behalf of Medway NHS 
Foundation Trust (‘the Trust’), I want to assure the family and you that the concerns 
have been acknowledged, considered, and acted upon. 

The Trust fully acknowledges the concerns outlined in the PFD report, especially that 
the incident within Mr Pollyn’s care, were not merely a failure of policy adherence, but 
also  reflected  deeper  behavioural,  cultural,  and  system  factors.  Although  relevant 
policies  and  documentation  were  in  place  at  the  time,  they  were  not  consistently 
applied in practice, leading to unsafe care and avoidable risks. 

In response, the Trust has taken a whole system approach, tackling both the specific 
clinical issues related to ‘nil by mouth’ care and the underlying cultural and behavioural 
factors that contributed to those failures. 

Addressing the immediate patient safety risks (‘nil by mouth’ care) 

A detailed Trust-wide ‘nil by mouth’ care improvement action plan has been developed 
and implemented to directly address the potential gaps identified during the Inquest. 
This action plan includes: 

•  Trust-wide, regular ‘nil by mouth’ audits to evaluate adherence to best practice, 
including  staff’s  ability  to  correctly  identify  ‘nil  by  mouth’  patients  and  the 
accuracy of documentation. 

•  Recurrent Trust-wide ‘nil by mouth’ audits for non-procedural patients, initially 
conducted on a quarterly basis while improvements are embedded. A baseline 
audit was completed in March 2026, with a re-audit scheduled for June 2026. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 Audit findings are reviewed by the Fundamental Standards of Care Group (a 
Trust-wide  steering  and  quality  improvement  group  focused  on  enhancing 
fundamental  nursing  care,  including  nutrition  and  hydration,  handover, 
mouthcare, and personal hygiene), and are escalated to the Patient Experience 
Sub-Committee and the Patient Safety and Harm Prevention Sub-Committee. 
•  Targeted education and training to enhance staff understanding of ‘nil by mouth’ 
status, supervised sips of water, and the clinical risks related to aspiration. This 
training  is  provided  face-to-face  alongside  nutrition  and  hydration  education, 
reinforced  through  Harm-Free  Care  study  days,  daily  ward  handovers,  and 
safety huddles. Training compliance is tracked via a central training database. 
•  Clear visual controls and environmental safeguards, including revised bedside 
signage, tracking board flags, and standardised prompts, aim to reduce reliance 
on  memory  or  assumptions.  These  include  standardised  bedside  signage 
stating ‘supervised water only,’ removal of unsupervised water jugs, visible ‘nil 
by  mouth’  indicators  on  electronic  patient  tracking  boards,  and  clear 
documentation prompts. All signage and visual controls are being standardised 
through the Fundamental Standards of Care Group. 
Introduction of a structured ‘nil by mouth’ checklist for non-procedural patients 
to minimise practice variations and ensure key safety steps are not overlooked. 
•  Strengthened  multidisciplinary  communication  to  ensure  all  staff  groups 
involved  in  bedside  care,  including  housekeeping  and  support  staff,  are 
included in safety huddles and handovers. 

• 

•  Digital  system  improvements,  including  exploration  of  automated  electronic 
patient record (EPR) alerts to identify documentation conflicts, such as when 
provision of water is recorded for a patient marked as ‘nil by mouth’. 

Oversight  of  these  actions  is  provided  through  established  governance  structures, 
including  the  Fundamentals  of  Care  Group,  Patient  Experience  Sub  Committee, 
Patient  Safety  and  Harm  Prevention  Sub  Committee,  and  the  Quality  Assurance 
Committee. These bodies operate with defined review cycles (detailed in Group Terms 
of  Reference)  to  ensure  sustainable  improvement  rather  than  relying  on  one-off 
compliance activities. 

Addressing behavioural and cultural contributors 

Crucially, the Trust has recognised that the issues highlighted in this PFD report go 
beyond  processes  and  include  normalised  behaviours,  such  as  task-driven  ‘box 
ticking’, and reliance on routine practice rather than individualised risk assessment. 

To address this, the Trust has integrated the ‘nil by mouth’ improvement work into its 
Cultural  Transformation  Programme,  a  multi-year  Board-led  initiative  aimed  at 
addressing the behavioural, leadership, and attitudinal factors that impact patient and 
staff safety. 

Phase 1 of the Cultural Transformation Programme (completed in September 2025) 
involved  extensive  listening  sessions  (events  where  staff  can  share  their  views, 
wishes,  and  feedback  based  on  their  experience),  workforce  surveys,  and  a  Board 
cultural competence review. This work identified consistent themes including: 

Inconsistent application of policy in practice 

• 
•  Reduced challenge and escalation in pressured environments 

 
 
 
 
 
 •  Normalisation of unsafe workarounds 
•  Fear of speaking up 
•  Variable leadership visibility and accountability. 

Some of these themes are directly related to the issues uncovered in Mr Pollyn’s case. 

These  insights  have  informed  a  series  of  high-impact  actions  already  in  progress, 
including: 

•  Stronger 

leadership  accountability 

frameworks 

that  explicitly  connect 

behaviours to appraisal, recognition, and consequences. 

•  Board-level  oversight  of  culture  and  safety,  with  regular  progress  review 

• 

integrated into formal governance. 
Improved psychological safety and speaking up initiatives, ensuring staff feel 
able to challenge unsafe practice without fear. 

•  Targeted development for middle and senior leaders, recognising their critical 

role in setting behavioural norms at ward level. 

•  Clear  reinforcement  that  patient  safety  outcomes  —  not  task  completion  — 

define success. 

Assurance of sustainability 

The Trust is clear that reassurance cannot be given through policies or training alone. 
Therefore, improvements are being integrated through: 

•  Recurrent audit and measurement 
•  Visible leadership ownership 
• 
•  Cultural metrics alongside clinical performance data 
•  Ongoing  monitoring  through  Patient  Safety  and  Harm  Prevention  Sub-

Integration into existing safety and quality governance 

Committee and Board reporting. 

The  Trust  is  committed  to  ensuring  that  the  lessons  learned  from  this  case  lead  to 
lasting improvements in how patients at high risk of aspiration are identified, protected, 
and cared for — and in how staff are supported, while complacency is challenged and 
addressed. 

Summary 

The  Trust accepts that  Mr  Pollyn’s death  highlighted  unacceptable gaps  in  practice 
and culture. Significant measures have been taken, and are ongoing, to address both 
the specific clinical risks identified by the Coroner and the wider cultural factors that 
allowed  these  risks  to  persist.  On  behalf  of  the  Trust,  I  am  confident  that  these 
combined measures materially reduce the likelihood of a similar death occurring in the 
future, and the organisation remains committed to continuous oversight, learning, and 
improvement. 

We thank the learned Coroner for raising this matter with us and for highlighting an 
opportunity to improve our process. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Yours sincerely,  

Deputy Chief Medical Officer 
Medway NHS Foundation Trust

Related reports

Other reports by Ian Potter

See all →

More reports categorised “Community health care and emergency services related deaths”

See all →

Track Medway NHS Foundation Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Medway NHS Foundation 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.