Sarah Huntbach, assisted by Christopher Frankling, recently represented a father at an inquest investigating the circumstances and cause of death of his son.
The deceased had been under the care of the mental health services and had suffered frequent bouts of relapse, primarily caused by social and relationship circumstances.
It was during a period of relapse that he took a paracetamol overdose. At the time, he was involved with the police and it was due to the police having found him that he was taken to hospital. He had also been drinking alcohol. At A&E, the staff were informed of the deceased being found with several cans of alcohol around him and empty packets of paracetamol. The deceased gave an indication of when he had taken the drugs and so with a blood test having been done, the information was able to be entered into the Toxbase system. The blood result, when factored in with the length of time elapsed since overdose, resulted in the plasma concentration falling below the treatment threshold. He was discharged back to the care of the police in custody. However, less than 24 hours later he reported again to the A&E department with a fast heart rate, pain in the lower abdomen and he had vomited. On this occasion a blood test was not done and his symptoms were attributed to alcohol withdrawal and he was discharged. He again returned 24 hours later, but this time was too ill for treatment. He subsequently died in hospital and at the inquest the medical cause of death was found to be paracetamol-induced liver injury.
At the inquest, the Toxbase guidelines for paracetamol overdose were considered and it was identified that guidelines stated a risk of severe liver toxicity developing in a few patients with a plasma paracetamol level that initially falls below the threshold for treatment. It was also identified at the inquest that the Toxbase guidelines do not expressly state whether they apply only to an initial attendance and as such would not be necessary for consideration on reattendance.
Following the deceased’s death, the NHS Trust undertook a ‘root cause analysis’. This was led by a Consultant Hepatologist and the conclusion was that if a blood test had been done upon arriving at A&E for the second time, it was likely to have been abnormal and treatment would have been offered. At the inquest, evidence was heard from both a registrar and consultant from the A&E department and both stated that, whilst they acknowledged the Toxbase guidelines identified the risk of severe toxicity development, they could not explain why the guidelines should not be considered and applied on representation to a hospital.
The Coroner was so concerned by this that she has issued a Rule 28 Regulation Report to the providers of the Toxbase guidelines, the National Poisons Information Service (NPIS). This imposes a duty on the NPIS to take action to prevent future deaths – the suggested action being to review the existing Toxbase guidance and how it is to be used with respect to representation at a hospital for paracetamol overdose.
It is not uncommon for a coroner to issue such a Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths where there is concern that existing practices should be reviewed / altered. The effect of this is to continue to identify and develop changing practice to ensure lessons are learned and steps are taken to minimise the risk of death.
For more information
For more information on clinical negligence claims, or if you require support through an inquest, please contact Sarah Huntbach.
Latest news
Anthony Collins advised B3Living on strategic acquisition of 250 social homes
The social housing team at Anthony Collins advised Hertfordshire-based B3Living on the successful acquisition of 250 social homes from Orbit Group.
Tuesday 19 November 2024
Read moreAnthony Collins promotes and appoints 19
19 promotions and appointments have been announced including two partners, two legal directors, two senior associates and four associates, as well as a number of appointments within the central management […]
Monday 4 November 2024
Read moreLatest webinars and podcasts
Podcast: Who gets the microwave? Episode 2 – Non-court dispute resolution
Listen to the second in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team where Tom Gregory, Chris Lloyd-Smith and Maria Ramon put down their litigation weapons and discuss the importance of […]
Friday 22 November 2024
Read morePODCAST: Who gets the microwave?
The first in a series of podcasts from our matrimonial team begins with the team discussing what happens to pets during divorce and separation.
Friday 16 August 2024
Read more