“The Northern Care Alliance (i) District Nurses and TVN 4”

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.

- 14. The Northern Care Alliance (i) District Nurses and TVN 4. The Court heard evidence that since the death of Mr Byron the District Nursing and Tissue Viability Nurses (TVNs) are now managed as part of the Northern Care Alliance and are jointly located. However there is no documented policy for the referring of patients from the District Nurses to the TVNs. "Unofficial” referrals could occur by way of conversations within the office and there is no policy to ensure these are recorded in writing and recorded in the patients notes. The Court heard evidence that such a referral was thought to have occurred in September 2016 but this was not documented anywhere. 2. Likewise if a referral is sent by email there no instruction to staff that such email must be uploaded into the patients records in order for it to be clearly seen by all workers that the patient has been referred. 3. Shortage of staff. One of the reasons there was a lack of continuity in the care of Mr Byron was the shortage of staff and the increased workload on the remaining staff. The Court was advised there remains a shortage of staff within the Tissue Viability Nurse team. (ii) Hospital In-patient 4. In this case the Trust Guideline ‘Patient Blood Management of Medical Patients’ sets out the Pathway for the Management of Anaemia. In addition to this Trust documents there is NICE guidance for Anaemia — iron deficiency (revised 2018). Both of these documents include as a key factor the obtaining of ferritin levels, albeit the question as to the interpretation of such results will be dependant on the patients presenting condition. On the 30" December 2016 no sample was taken to check the ferritin levels. 2. In addition there was no evidence that on the 30" December or the 9" January 2017 the pharmacist checked Mr Byrons ferritin level. The Court heard from the Clinical lead pharmacist that she would expect this to be done. There was a clear difference between the advice and expectations of the Pharmacist and the Clinical team. 3. The Court heard of discussions which take place between the Pharmacists and clinicians. These can take place at times when the pharmacist is off the ward. In these circumstances there is no ability for the pharmacist to record such discussions. There was no record anywhere of any discussions on the 30°" December 2016 or the 9" January 2017 and any such advice provided, so there was no way of confirming if such conversations had taken place. 4. The Court heard the Trust Guideline ‘Patient Blood Management of Medical Patients’ indicated the patient was to be observed for 30 minutes during the administration of the iron infusion. Due to a lack of recording the nurse who administered the iron infusion on the 30" December 2017 could not be identified. The nurse on the 9" January 2017 gave evidence to the Court that this was the first time she had administered an iron infusion and she was advised by the Sister to “treat it as a blood transfusion” whereby his observations were taken before and immediately after commencement of the infusion and then observations taken every 15 minutes. Hence Mr Byron was left alone during the administration of the iron infusion. The Court heard the policy was unclear as to whether it meant nurses had to remain with the patient constantly for 30 minutes. 5. In addition for out-patients who may receive an iron infusion the Court received evidence that they would be handed a buzzer. The Court would question how this would be of use should a patient suffer a cardiac arrest such occurred with Mr Byron. Points 4 and 5 link into the Regulation 28 to the Royal College of Nursing also. Oldham Clinical Commissioning Group 4. The Court heard evidence that at times there was a lack of appropriate dressings in order to treat Mr Byrons infected pressure sores. The Court heard evidence the District Nurses cannot order more than two weeks worth of dressings for any individual patient and cannot hold extra stock. In Mr Byrons case due to the severity and location of the pressure sores there were times when he used more dressings, especially if they came away from the wounds. This could lead to a shortage and meant him having to wait for dressings. In someone with severe pressures sores the requirement to have access to the appropriate dressings is important. The Court heard this instruction regarding the ordering of dressings is governed by the Clinical Commissioning Group. Royal College of Nursing 1. Inthe most recent guidance from the Royal College of Nursing dated May 2019, “lron Deficiency and Anaemia in Adults” the instruction to nurses is for them to “observe the patient for 30 minutes”. The Court heard evidence from the Divisional Director of Nursing for the Northern Care Alliance who told the Court, in his view this instruction to nurses is unclear. This instruction was felt to be open to interpretation as to whether this means nurses should physically remain with the patient constantly for 30 minutes. If this is what is meant then it was suggested the instruction could be made more specific. Royal College of Pathologists and the Chief Coroner for England and Wales 4. The quality of the post mortem examination report produced i was wholly unsatisfactory and proven inaccurate. This meant both the bereaved family and the Trust were initially provided with an inaccurate medical cause of death. As a direct consequence the ability to learn lessons in order to prevent future deaths was not captured in a timely manner. It was not until the Coroner obtained a report fro sn 2018 that anaphylaxis was offered as a potential cause of death. Even then, the Court was left having to consider the totality of the evidence and it was not until the Inquest that a finding of fact as to the medical cause of death was made. 2. It should be noted the quality of Pos mortem practice has been and remains questionable in over 20 Inquests within the No anchester Coronial area. This is not an iso

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, 2019-0364

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