Source · Prevention of Future Deaths

Margaret Templeman

Ref: 2026-0382 Date: 20 Jul 2026 Coroner: Rebecca Mundy Area: Essex 1 response identified · 1 indexed addressee View PDF

Response deadline: 23 November 2026 (estimated from the Judiciary.uk publication date).

Date 20 Jul 2026
56-day deadline 23 Nov 2026 est. estimated from the Judiciary.uk publication date
Responses identified 1 of 1

Coroner's concerns

Coroner’s Concerns (source excerpt)
CORONER’S CONCERNS Concern 1: Inadequate Clinical Record Keeping During the course of this investigation I heard evidence of significant deficiencies in the maintenance of clinical records relating to hydration, nutrition, communication, observations, medication management and aspects of clinical decision making. The deficiencies were such that I was unable to determine whether important elements of care...
View full coroner's concerns
CORONER’S CONCERNS Concern 1: Inadequate Clinical Record Keeping During the course of this investigation I heard evidence of significant deficiencies in the maintenance of clinical records relating to hydration, nutrition, communication, observations, medication management and aspects of clinical decision making. The deficiencies were such that I was unable to determine whether important elements of care had been provided appropriately, or at all.

This is not an isolated concern. I have encountered similar failings in record keeping and documentation in other inquests involving different wards and hospital sites within the Trust, as have other Coroners within this jurisdiction. I am concerned that inadequate clinical records create a risk that deterioration in patients may not be identified promptly, that care may not be delivered consistently, that clinical decisions may not be appropriately informed, and that subsequent investigations into patient safety incidents are hindered.

Concern 2: Failure to Document Communication and Escalation Evidence revealed little or no documentation of communication with family members, discussions regarding changes in treatment plans, surgical cancellations, concerns raised or information shared by relatives, or internal communication between healthcare professionals.

Family members in this case provided supporting information about Margaret’s conditions and raised concerns regarding her deterioration which ultimately preceded the diagnosis of sepsis, yet there was limited documentation of their instructions or concerns or any action taken in response.

I am concerned that failures to record and communicate information effectively between staff and with families create a risk that important clinical information may be lost, deterioration may not be recognised or acted upon, and opportunities to intervene may be missed.

Concern 3: Reliability of Patient Safety Assurance Processes The Trust’s own review identified learning regarding communication, documentation and the timing of treatment. However, evidence heard during the inquest revealed additional shortcomings that were either not identified or could not be fully explored because of inadequacies in the contemporaneous records.

I am concerned that where record keeping is poor, the Trust may be unable to accurately assess the quality and safety of care delivered, identify learning, or assure itself that risks have been addressed. Concern 4: Trust-Wide Nature of the Issue

I am concerned that the documentation and communication failures identified in this case may not be confined to a single ward, clinical team or hospital site. Similar concerns have arisen in multiple inquests heard by this Court involving different areas of the Trust.

In circumstances where recurring deficiencies are being identified across multiple services, there is a risk that systemic shortcomings exist in relation to record keeping, documentation standards, clinical communication and oversight. Unless effective action is taken, there remains a risk that future patients may suffer harm and that future deaths may occur.

Responses

1 respondent

Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust

NHS Trust
PDF
AI-classified response stance Action Taken
AI-generated response summary

The Trust has recently launched a Ward Accreditation Scheme to improve care quality and record-keeping, with all wards to be accredited by year-end. They are also developing a new Electronic Patient Record (NOVA) system, expected to go live in June 2027, to integrate and replace current record systems.

View full response
Dear Ms Mundy, Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Mrs Margaret Rosina Templeman I write further to your Prevention of Future Deaths Report, dated 20 July 2026, following the Inquest hearing touching on the death of Mrs Templeman. We have considered your concerns and now set out our formal response to the following concerns raised:
1. Inadequate clinical record keeping
2. Failure to document communication and escalation
3. Reliability of patient safety assurances
4. Trust wide nature of the issue We recognise that adequate record keeping is absolutely essential to support safe and high- quality care for our patients and we are committed to making improvements in all the areas described in your report. NOVA New Electronic Patient Record (EPR) We are developing a new single digital patient record system called ‘NOVA’. This will integrate and replace our current record systems in all clinical areas and will be implemented at all our hospital sites. NOVA will provide real-time and accurate patient history to support clinical decision making. Clinicians will have the ability to add and access clear information in real-time to enable quicker and personalised care for our patients, reducing the need for paper-based processes and multiple systems. Once embedded, we expect NOVA will reduce the administrative burden on staff and improve the quality of the records kept with the aim of reducing the occurrence of poor record keeping. NOVA is currently in its testing stage, expected to run through the remainder of the year. As per current timelines, the system is expected to go live in June 2027.

[Page 2] Ward Accreditation Scheme We have recently launched our ‘Ward Accreditation’ quality improvement programme designed to recognise and reward inpatient wards that consistently deliver safe, effective, and high-quality patient care. The programme uses a tiered framework, with bronze, silver and gold standards representing increasing levels of achievement, quality and excellence. The accreditation award will be calculated using the average score across all 9 domains. Bronze 65-80% Silver 81-90% Gold 91-100% Platinum Gold for two consecutive years By the end of September 2026 twenty wards will be accredited, and all remaining wards will pass through the accreditation process by the end of the year. Ward Accreditation assesses nine key domains of performance; compliance with high-quality record keeping standards is a key focus in all domains. In the domain of “Getting the Basics Right’ we focus on nutrition and hydration, skin health and pressure injury prevention, bedrail assessments, care rounds and pain management. Patient records are scrutinised to ensure that all documentation is complete in these areas; records are reviewed to ensure they are legible and compliant with the relevant trust policies. The domain ‘Escalation & Planning’ identifies compliance with our policies and patient notes are assessed for evidence that the correct escalation processes have been followed and documented as they should be in each case. The ‘Medicines Management’ domain assesses whether medicines, controlled drugs and medical gases are stored, monitored, managed and documented safely. It focuses on secure storage, accurate recording of temperature and controlled drug checks, management of expired or unattended medicines, correct syringe storage, and safe handling of oxygen cylinders and medical gas systems to reduce medication-related risks and ensure regulatory compliance. We have a standalone domain solely focused on ‘Documentation’ to assess compliance with document security, information governance, and record-keeping standards. The domain measures the secure storage of patient records and protection of confidential information, while also assessing the quality of clinical documentation, including whether entries are complete, legible, dated and timed, attributable to the appropriate clinician, and demonstrate ongoing accurate documentation of patient care. Post accreditation visit, each ward receives an individual domain report, and a thematic analysis of the accreditation data including suggestions on which areas will require improvement. We are confident that issues relating to the quality of documentation and record keeping will be identified through the accreditation process and improve oversight and visibility of areas where we must focus our attention.

[Page 3] Wards attaining ‘gold’ status are identified as ‘pioneers’ for good practice and will mentor colleagues to improve performance, the second phase to this work will focus on supporting wards to improve and/or maintain their accreditation status. Audits Audit plays a key role in monitoring our compliance with documentation and record keeping standards. ‘Tendable’ is the Trust’s clinical audit tool used by all clinical areas to monitor performance against key metrics; Tendable produces a thematic analysis to identify areas of concern. We have a comprehensive programme of audits conducted on a monthly/quarterly basis depending on the required schedule; all clinical areas are assessed for their compliance with documentation requirements and reports are shared with the matrons to take action as required. Where a report identifies a deadline performance score below 50%, the report is shared directly with the Associate Director of Nursing for that area for escalation, oversight and accountability purposes. Ongoing performance is then managed through established governance channels. In addition to NOVA, Ward Accreditation, and our audit programme, we will continue to reinforce clear expectations of what is required for high-quality record keeping in our daily clinical huddles. If I can assist any further with these matters, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Report sections

Investigation and inquest
On 4 August 2025 I commenced an investigation into the death of Margaret Rosina Templeman, 82. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 16 July 2026. The conclusion of the inquest was a narrative conclusion.

Margaret died from a combination of natural causes and the effects of a fall at home, resulting in a fractured neck of femur, which more than minimally contributed to her death.
Circumstances of the death
Margaret was an 82-year-old lady with a number of significant long-term health conditions, including chronic kidney disease, type II diabetes, and heart failure.

On 16 July 2025, Margaret was admitted to Southend University Hospital after an accidental fall at home. She suffered a fracture of the left neck of femur.

Margaret was admitted under the Orthopaedic Team. Surgery for her hip was considered and further investigations, including an MRI scan, confirmed the fracture. However, concerns later developed around the risks of surgery because of her heart and kidney conditions.

Margaret’s condition worsened and on 18 July 2025, her kidney function had deteriorated significantly and she had developed a Stage 3 Acute Kidney Injury. Following further blood tests she was diagnosed with urosepsis.

Despite treatment, Margaret’s condition continued to worsen. By 19 July 2025 following discussions between the treating clinicians and her family about her prognosis and treatment options, it was concluded that further aggressive treatment was unlikely to result in a meaningful recovery. Margaret received palliative care until her death on 24 July 2025.
Action should be taken
In my opinion unless action is taken to address the above concerns then there is a significant risk of future deaths and I believe each of you have the power to take such action.

Similar PFD reports

Shared signals

Report details

Reference
2026-0382
Date of report
20 July 2026
Coroner
Rebecca Mundy
Coroner area
Essex

Responses identified

Responses identified 1 of 1
All listed responses identified

Organisations named in PFD reports are normally expected to respond within 56 days. Deadline: 23 Nov 2026 (estimated from the Judiciary.uk publication date).

Sent to

Mid and South Essex NHS Foundation Trust

Source links