Minute Book, home
Coroner’s reportPrevention of future deaths · 2023-0188

“Jean had spent a lengthy period in the general hospital discharge lounge, during which…”

Dated 9 Jun 2023, from the coroner for Derby and Derbyshire. Sent to 3 organisations or people.

A coroner wrote this report after an inquest, to warn the organisations below about a risk of further deaths.

Read the full report on judiciary.uk

How this works

The 56-day response deadline

Deadline passed

Replies were due by 4 Aug 2023. 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.

  1. Report dated9 Jun 2023
  2. Deadline4 Aug 2023
  3. Published on judiciary.uk13 Jun 2023
  4. 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.

Next we ask your name, then send a link to confirm and create your free account. Already have an account? Sign in

Responses from each recipient

Responses from each recipient
Sent toResponse
University Hospitals of Derby and Burton NHS Foundation TrustDeadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 4 Aug 2023. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.
Derbyshire Community Health Services NHS Foundation TrustDeadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 4 Aug 2023. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.
East Midlands Ambulance Service NHS TrustNamed in the report as “East Midlands Ambulance Service”Deadline passedNo response published on judiciary.uk so far. The 56-day deadline was 4 Aug 2023. A reply may have been sent and not yet published.

The coroner’s concerns

1. Jean had spent a lengthy period in the general hospital discharge lounge, during which time which she would not have had close checks and observations as compared to wardbased care. She did not arrive at the rehabilitation hospital until late at night and so did not have the usual core admission assessments. Such situations appear to me to have the potential to place patients such as Jean at significant risk. Given that there would usually be three parties involved in the transfer (the discharging hospital, the transporting ambulance service, and the discharge destination) there is opportunity for consideration of protocols to ensure such discharge arrangements are safe and appropriate. 2. Jean had signs of infection to the surgical site on arrival at the rehabilitation hospital and should have had more robust clinical review but confirmation of infection and referral back to the general hospital did not occur until her blood results were reviewed 3 days later. There had been opportunity to expedite the blood results. On the evidence at inquest there is reason to think that the rehabilitation staff were falsely reassured by a low NEWS score whereas there was suspected infection that could have been confirmed earlier.

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, 2023-0188
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

AI

Summaries and questions, with page references. Pro and above.

Sign in to use