Latest news with #MarthasRule
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Parental intuition better at spotting child illness than vital signs, study finds
Parental intuition is more likely to predict critical illness among children than vital signs used to monitor health, according to a study that strengthens the case for families to have a right to a second opinion under Martha's rule being piloted in the NHS. Experts from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, said parents should be treated as part of a child's care team in hospital after data on almost 190,000 emergency hospital visits involving children. The researchers found that prenatal concern was associated with a higher likelihood the child would need to be given help to breathe, or mechanical ventilation. The research, published in the Lancet's journal on Child and Adolescent Health, noted that in almost one in five cases (19.3%) parents raised concerns about deterioration before vital signs indicated that the child was deteriorating. It comes after the tragic case of Martha Mills, who developed sepsis after an injuring her pancreas when she fell off her bike. She died in 2021 when doctors ignored repeatedly the concerns of her parents about her deterioration while in hospital. A coroner ruled she would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs of her rapidly deteriorating condition and transferred her to intensive care earlier. A campaign by Martha's mother, Merope Mills, an editor at the Guardian, and her father, Paul Laity, led NHS hospitals to pilot Martha's rule, which gives patients and their loved ones the right to an urgent review of treatment. Last December, NHS England data showed the rule was having a 'transformative effect' in improving patient safety. In the Melbourne study, parents and carers were routinely asked: 'Are you worried your child is getting worse?' In 4.7% of cases parents said they were concerned their child was deteriorating. The research team found that parents' and carers' concerns were 'significantly' linked to the child being admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). When parents raised concerns, children were four times more likely to need ICU care, compared with children of parents who did not express concern. They also found that parental concern was more strongly associated with ICU admission than abnormal vital signs were – including abnormal heart rate, abnormal breathing or blood pressure. This could mean that taking parents' views into account could lead to earlier treatment, they added. Overall, they found that children of caregivers who voiced concerns were 'more unwell, they were more likely to be admitted to an inpatient ward, and stayed in hospital almost three times as long'. One of the lead authors of the paper, Dr Erin Mills, from Monash University's School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, said: 'We know that parents are the experts in their children, but stories of parents not being heard, followed by devastating outcomes, are all too common. We wanted to change that.' She added: 'If a parent said they were worried, their child was around four times more likely to require intensive care. That's a signal we can't afford to ignore. 'Parents are not visitors – they are part of the care team. We want every hospital to recognise that and give parents permission, and power, to speak up.'
The Guardian
3 days ago
- General
- The Guardian
Parental intuition better at spotting child illness than vital signs, study finds
Parental intuition is more likely to predict critical illness among children than vital signs used to monitor health, according to a study that strengthens the case for families to have a right to a second opinion under Martha's rule being piloted in the NHS. Experts from Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, said parents should be treated as part of a child's care team in hospital after data on almost 190,000 emergency hospital visits involving children. The researchers found that prenatal concern was associated with a higher likelihood the child would need to be given help to breathe, or mechanical ventilation. The research, published in the Lancet's journal on Child and Adolescent Health, noted that in almost one in five cases (19.3%) parents raised concerns about deterioration before vital signs indicated that the child was deteriorating. It comes after the tragic case of Martha Mills, who developed sepsis after an injuring her pancreas when she fell off her bike. She died in 2021 when doctors ignored repeatedly the concerns of her parents about her deterioration while in hospital. A coroner ruled she would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs of her rapidly deteriorating condition and transferred her to intensive care earlier. A campaign by Martha's mother, Merope Mills, an editor at the Guardian, and her father, Paul Laity, led NHS hospitals to pilot Martha's rule, which gives patients and their loved ones the right to an urgent review of treatment. Last December, NHS England data showed the rule was having a 'transformative effect' in improving patient safety. In the Melbourne study, parents and carers were routinely asked: 'Are you worried your child is getting worse?' In 4.7% of cases parents said they were concerned their child was deteriorating. The research team found that parents' and carers' concerns were 'significantly' linked to the child being admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). When parents raised concerns, children were four times more likely to need ICU care, compared with children of parents who did not express concern. They also found that parental concern was more strongly associated with ICU admission than abnormal vital signs were – including abnormal heart rate, abnormal breathing or blood pressure. This could mean that taking parents' views into account could lead to earlier treatment, they added. Overall, they found that children of caregivers who voiced concerns were 'more unwell, they were more likely to be admitted to an inpatient ward, and stayed in hospital almost three times as long'. One of the lead authors of the paper, Dr Erin Mills, from Monash University's School of Clinical Sciences at Monash Health, said: 'We know that parents are the experts in their children, but stories of parents not being heard, followed by devastating outcomes, are all too common. We wanted to change that.' She added: 'If a parent said they were worried, their child was around four times more likely to require intensive care. That's a signal we can't afford to ignore. 'Parents are not visitors – they are part of the care team. We want every hospital to recognise that and give parents permission, and power, to speak up.'
The Guardian
19-05-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Senior doctor accused of failures in case that gave rise to Martha's rule
A senior doctor has been accused of wrongly failing to escalate the care of a 13-year-old girl whose death led to the adoption of Martha's rule, which gives the right to a second medical opinion in hospitals. At a disciplinary tribunal in Manchester, Prof Richard Thompson was also said to have provided a colleague with 'false and misleading information' about the condition of Martha Mills. Martha died on 31 August 2021 at King's College hospital (KCH) in south London after contracting sepsis. In 2022, a coroner ruled that she would most likely have survived if doctors had identified the warning signs of her rapidly deteriorating condition and transferred her to intensive care earlier, which her parents had asked doctors to do. Thompson, a specialist in paediatric liver disease, and the on-duty consultant – although he was on call at home – on 29 August 2021, is accused by the General Medical Council (GMC) of misconduct that impairs his fitness to practise. Opening the GMC's case at the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service on Monday, Christopher Rose said, based on a review of the case by Dr Stephen Playfor, a medical examiner at Manchester Royal Infirmary, Thompson: Should have taken more 'aggressive intervention' between noon and 1pm on 29 August, including referring Martha to the paediatric intensive care unit (PICU). Should have gone into the hospital from about 5pm to carry out an in-person assessment of a rash Martha had developed. Gave 'false, outdated and misleading information' in a phone call at approximately 9.40pm to Dr Akash Deep in the PICU team. Rose told the tribunal that during the call to Deep, Thompson gave a 'highly inaccurate description' of Martha's condition as 'stable'. He said Thompson told his colleague that Martha's systolic blood pressure was at 100mmHg when it had been below that level since 2pm, and did not mention the rash. Thompson also told Deep that a review of Martha by someone from the PICU team would just get her parents 'more stressed and anxious', the tribunal heard. Rose told the disciplinary panel: 'Prof Deep said Prof Thompson told him that Martha was stable and did not need a review … Martha was not stable and GMC say it was entirely incorrect for Prof Thompson to have given Prof Deep that impression.' Thompson denies the allegations against him. Rose told the tribunal that Thompson claims that he acted according to established medical literature. The doctor also says that his assessment that Martha did not need a review, as communicated on the call with Deep, was separate to his concern about causing her parents increased stress or anxiety. Martha was transferred to intensive care on 30 August 2021 by which time she had septic shock, according to a serious incident report produced for KCH. She had sustained an injury to her pancreas when she fell off her bike on a summer holiday. Doctors at King's College did not listen to the concerns of her parents, Merope Mills, a senior editor at the Guardian, and her husband, Paul Laity, including that she could have had sepsis, a significant cause of avoidable death that kills an estimated 40,000 people a year in the UK. Martha's rule came as a result of pressure on politicians, NHS bosses and doctors after Mills and Laity spoke out about their experience. The hearing in Manchester continues.
