“The Inquest was told that Greater Manchester has a stroke network”
Dated 14 Nov 2025, from the coroner for Manchester South. Sent to 1 organisation or person.
A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.
The 56-day response deadline
All responses publishedReplies were due by 9 Jan 2026.
Organisations that receive a report must reply to the coroner within 56 days, saying what they will do or why they will do nothing. We show whether a response is published on judiciary.uk; a reply may have been sent and not yet published.
- Report dated14 Nov 2025
- Deadline9 Jan 2026
- Published on judiciary.uk18 Nov 2025
- Today23 Oct 2026
Watch this report
We’ll email you when a response is published on judiciary.uk, or when the 56 days to reply end with none published there yet. Free, and you can stop with one click.
Responses from each recipient
| Sent to | Response |
|---|---|
| NHS Greater Manchester Integrated Care BoardNamed in the report as “Greater Manchester Integrated Care” | Response publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in November 2025. |
The coroner’s concerns
– The Inquest was told that Greater Manchester has a stroke network. In essence there are 3 hospitals that are stroke centres, and that Stepping Hill is one of them. However, under the system overnight (after 11.30pm) Salford Royal provides all expert stroke input into the other 2 centres. This is because the assessment of need has identified that the presence of stroke provision overnight at the other 2 centres is not justified by the demand. During the course of the inquest there appeared to be some confusion amongst some of the stroke clinicians who support the work as to the level of support that was to be provided by Salford Royal overnight to Stepping Hill. This creates a risk that expert and complex advice is not given as quickly as necessary. The evidence was that many of the decisions in relation to how to deal with complications arising from thrombolysis in a stroke patient need to be made by a stroke consultant and are time critical. In Mrs Crooks case the evidence of the stroke team was that they would have expected the overnight team based at Salford to have advised the Stepping Hill medical team to start giving treatment before the transfer to Salford Royal. The advice whilst Mrs Crooks was at Stepping Hill appears to have been given by the stroke Registrar at Salford rather than with input from the stroke consultant. In Mrs Cooks’ case it could not be confirmed that the outcome would have been different if she had received earlier treatment or there had been input earlier from a stroke consultant but in other cases a delay could change the outcome.
An extract. Read the full report, including the circumstances of the death, on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website.
- Source
- judiciary.uk, Prevention of Future Deaths reports, 2025-0581
- Added to Minute Book
- 8 Oct 2026
- Reuse
- We show short extracts and link to the original. We don’t host the full report.
Something wrong, such as a date or who it was sent to? Report a mistake
Is this report about someone close to you? You can ask us to remove names from our pages.
Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, judiciary.uk. Open Government Licence v3.0
Ask about this report
AISummaries and questions, with page references. Pro and above.
Sign in to use