“5 1”

The coroner’s concerns

– 5 1. On the 4th May 2020 Azra's mother and daughter had been in telephone contact with the nurse in charge on the ward expressing concerns that Azra had messaged them to say she had attempted suicide using shoelaces as a ligature. The nurse spoke to Azra who denied making a ligature, Azra's neck was examined and she had no marks from ligature use. The shoelaces from one pair of shoes were removed but other shoelaces, clothing and bedding were left in her possession as it was felt that Azra was not at an immediate risk. She was not believed to be at immediate risk because, whilst it was a feature of her mental state common to many patients that she would regularly talk about not wanting to live and requesting an overdose, there was no evidence that she had made an active suicide attempt and she had no history of suicide or self-harm attempts. The fact that she was now saying that she had attempted to make a ligature was a change in her presentation (her previous suicidal ideation had centred around requesting assistance to overdose), it was also of significance that she was saying one thing to her family and something different to a clinician. BSMHT accepted that the information was significant and therefore there ought to have been consideration of it by her treating team with a review of her risk and observation levels. However, no record at all was made of the family's concerns and the account given by Azra. Her risk screen was not updated, an incident report was not raised, and the information was not included in handover to the next shift or at the next MDT on the 6th May. Therefore, it was not considered at an MDT meeting on the 6th May 2020. Due to the COVID19 pandemic Azra's family could not attend that meeting and raise their concerns directly. Microsoft Teams was used by some clinicians to attend the MDT on the 6th May but was not made available to Azra's family nor was a telephone number to dial into the meeting. BSMHT has put in a system for a form to be completed in advance of an MDT which requires the family's input to be sought, placed on the form and considered in the MDT. It is my concern that this is equivalent to the family being included in the meeting (prior to COVID families were invited to attend MDTs): there is the potential that information will not be recorded accurately or will not be understood in written form, it also doesn't afford family the opportunity to hear the plan arising from the meeting and provide their views. There is no reason why attendance by a remote platform or telephone line at the meeting itself cannot be offered to family for all MDTs. 2. BSMHT had risk assessed ward 2 for ligature points, including the en-suite bathrooms, in November 2019. The en-suite bathroom doors were given the highest risk score possible on an acute ward, but no corrective action was identified to remove or mitigate the risk: the risk assessment relied on clinical assessment and observation of the service user to mitigate the risk. Evidence was given at the inquest that pressure sensor alarms have been available in the UK from numerous manufacturers for 10 years, BSMHT had been investigating and testing different pressure sensor alarms for en-suite bathroom doors for approximately 2 years before Azra's death. BSMHT has now identified an appropriate pressure sensor for en-suite bathroom doors and the en-suite bathroom door of room 14 on ward 2 was replaced in November 2020 with a door incorporating a pressure sensor alarm. BSMHT has a 17 month program to fit pressure sensor alarms to all en-suite bathroom doors within its inpatient units. However, this is not being considered for other doors within the bedroom area nor is there any national requirement for inpatient mental health units to place, or consider placing, pressure sensor alarms on doors within areas where patients are afforded privacy and time alone. I am concerned that within BSMHT's inpatient units there will be a continuing risk from other doors in the bedroom area (including the main bedroom door) even when the en-suite bathroom doors are fitted with pressure sensor alarms. Although the outer face of a bedroom door will be on a communal corridor, service users on level 1 and 2 observations will have periods where they are unobserved in their rooms and could wedge a ligature at the top of a door so that it wasn't obviously visible from outside. Furthermore, in the absence of any national regulations or guidance on this topic the risk from en-suite and other doors in areas where service users spend time unobserved will persist in mental health units operated by other Trusts and private providers around the country.

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, 2021-0082

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