“Evidence was given by (Consultant Paramedic) that: Based on LAS statistics the…”
Dated 21 Apr 2017, from the coroner for Inner North London. 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
Deadline passedReplies were due by 16 Jun 2017. 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 dated21 Apr 2017
- Deadline16 Jun 2017
- Published on judiciary.uk5 Jun 2017
- 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 |
|---|---|
| London Ambulance Service NHS Trust | Deadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 16 Jun 2017. A reply may have been sent and not yet published. |
The coroner’s concerns
1. Evidence was given by (Consultant Paramedic) that: Based on LAS statistics the survival rate from cardiac arrest, where there is a shockable rhythm is around 31% when defibrillation occurs; This is to be contrasted against a survival rate of around 9% for all presenting rhythms; For every minute of cardiac arrest where a shockable rhythm is present and no defibrillation is carried out, survival decreases by approximately 7-10%. 2. Evidence was also given from other Ambulance staff that: Despite the presence of other staff between 10.12am and 10.36am, no cross check was made as to whether Najeeb had a shockable rhythm; If an Automated External Defibrillator, such as those used by members of the public had been applied, this would have detected a shockable rhythm and would have proceeded to defibrillate Najeeb. 3. I consider that it would be of great benefit if LAS were to take the 2 following steps, namely training and instruction to staff to: 6 Actively cross check with another clinician whether a shockable rhythm is present when attending an incident of this sort; Use the defibrillator in AED mode when first attending as a matter of routine, or at the very least if uncertain when interpreting a heart rhythm; Further educate on the interpretation of shockable rhythms from readings provided by defibrillator devices.
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, 2017-0132
- 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