“Although there were written warnings of Mrs Hammond's allergy on hospital documentation…”
Dated 4 Nov 2013, from the coroner for Lincolnshire (Central). Sent to 2 organisations or people.
A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.
The 56-day response deadline
Deadline passedReplies were due by 30 Dec 2013. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.
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.
- Report dated4 Nov 2013
- Deadline30 Dec 2013
- Published on judiciary.uk4 Nov 2013
- Today22 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 |
|---|---|
| United Lincolnshire Teaching Hospitals NHS TrustNamed in the report as “Chief Executive, United Lincolnshire Hospital Trust” | Response publishedPublished on judiciary.uk in May 2014. |
| Lincoln County Hospital | Deadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 30 Dec 2013. A reply may have been sent and not yet published. |
Some responses were published as scans, so their text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.
The coroner’s concerns
This report was published as a scan, so its text was read automatically. Check the wording against the original before you quote it.
— (1) Although there were written warnings of Mrs Hammond's allergy on hospital documentation they appear not to be have been noticed by the nurse who administered augmentin. In an effort to highlight the fact that a patient has an allergy | feel that there needs to be a much clearer indication on the file that the patient has such an allergy. At the inquest, it was suggested that a different coloured file should be used for any patient who has an allergy. Alternatively, a large sticker on the front of the file warning of the allergy would assist. (2) It appears that when Mrs Hammond transferred from the A&E unit to the EAU she was accompanied by a nurse who had little knowledge of Mrs Hammond's condition. As a consequence no discussion took place at the handover regarding the nature of Mrs Hammond's allergy to penicillin. It is felt that if the nurse who had cared for Mrs Hammond in the A&E department had personally accompanied her to the EAU this would have enabled a more productive handover and would have given an opportunity for discussion regarding the allergy. Although | appreciate there may be practical difficulties | would suggest that in future the nurse who has provided care for the patient in A&E should always accompany the patient to the EAU department in order that constructive handover can take place. (3) Your representative at the inquest hearing was not clear as to whether the doctor involved in this case was going to be referred to the General Medical Council and the nurse who administered Augmentin was going to be referred to the Nursing & Midwifery Council it was agreed that he would inform me of this within 14 days of conclusion of the inquest.
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, 2013-0286
- 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