Skip to content
recurance

Annette Lewis

6 Mar 2025 · Coroner Kerrie Burge · South Wales Central

This report repeats 1 earlier warning. See the linked reports.

The coroner's concerns

  1. 1. discharge without surgical review

    “[the deceased] should have been referred for surgical review rather than being discharged”

Linked reports

Repeats an earlier warningDarren Goddard9 Mar 2020 · 5 years earlier
Closely relatedConfidence 0.80 · moderate

Earlier report

“(3) Premature discharge post-operatively from the recovery unit with the missed opportunity to recognise the adverse effect of sepsis when they occurred.”
Original on judiciary.uk ↗

This report

“[the deceased] should have been referred for surgical review rather than being discharged.”
Full chain: Discharge without surgical review or sepsis recognition

Responses

  • 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