Skip to content
recurance

Inaccessible patient information in SystmOne

Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderate3 reports · 2014–2020No published response to an earlier report One-page brief (print or PDF)

Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust received 3 coroners' reports about this hazard between 19 Feb 2014 and 21 Feb 2020.

They came from 3 different coroners in 3 coroner areas. A similar concern was raised again 2 times after the first warning.

A published response was found for 1 of the 2 earlier reports, stating 10 specific actions.

3
reports
3
different coroners
2014–2020
years
0.80
lowest link confidence

The story, report by report

Spacing grows with the time between reports.

  1. First warning

    Simon McAndrew↗

    19 Feb 2014 · Dr R N Palmer · London (North)

    “There are issues of poor communication which need to be addressed. I acknowledge that even the most detailed communication in this instance may not have averted Mr McAndrews' actions and subsequent death.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    No published response from Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust was found for this report.

  2. 3 years 5 months later

    Raised again · 1st time

    Sarah Reed↗

    28 Jul 2017 · Sir Peter Thornton QC · London (City)

    Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderatea different coroner
    “The jury also found the system of some members of the multi-disciplinary team recording observations which were not accessible to all other members of the team to be 'detrimental'”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust responded, stating 10 specific actions.Response (PDF) ↗Response (PDF) ↗

    “psychiatric reports. Work to review the procedures for obtaining and providing psychiatric reports is already underway, recognising the particular gap in relation to provision of reports for the purposes of fitness to plead. Following your letter to , Chief Executive HMCTS, I can confirm that in July 2017 HMCTS and the Judicial Office re- issued existing guidance from 2010 on this process, with the caveat that it is recognised that some information may be out of date. The Senior Presiding Judge has”

    Stated timescale: July 2017

    “The ACCT document is currently being redesigned with a view to its nationwide re- introduction in early 2018. As part of this redesign, we will consider your suggestion that a summary sheet of ACCT observations and conversations be included”

    Stated timescale: early 2018

    8 more stated actions in the Promises tab.

  3. 2 years 7 months later

    Raised again · 2nd time

    Andrew Goldstraw↗

    21 Feb 2020 · Simon Burge · Hampshire (Central)

    Identical hazardConfidence 0.90 · higha different coroner
    “SystmOne makes it difficult for a doctor or mental health nurse to ascertain the key information needed to undertake a risk assessment and to decide whether or not to open an ACCT.”
    Original on judiciary.uk ↗

    Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust responded.Response (PDF) ↗

  4. All reports to Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust

Next

This shows that a similar concern was raised again after an earlier report. It does not say why, and it is not a finding about any organisation or person. To report an error, see the corrections route.

  • Built with
  • NVIDIA Nemotron Nano, Super and Ultra
  • Nebius Token Factory inference
  • Qwen3 Embedding 8B on Token Factory
  • Tavily follow-up web search
  • Postgres and pgvector search
  • Next.js site

Source: Prevention of Future Deaths reports and responses published by the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary at judiciary.uk. Crown copyright, used under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Data updated 26 Oct 2026.

A link shows that a similar concern was raised again, not why. It is not a finding about any organisation or person. Methodology and responsible use · Report an error