Dear FOI Officer,

Re: Freedom of Information Request – Incident Reports INC150227 and INC152492

I am writing to request the disclosure of documents under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Specifically, I would like to request the full DATIX and/or patient safety investigation reports for the following incidents:

INC150227: Concerning the thrombolysis bleep held by a Physician Associate.
INC152492: Concerning a trainee Anaesthesia Associate in theatre alone.

Finally, I would like any full copies of any other incidents matching a free text search of "Physician Associate" or "Anaesthesia Associate".

I understand that some portions of these reports may be subject to redaction due to patient confidentiality or other exemptions under the FOIA. However, I request that all non-exempt sections be made available, particularly those concerning any safety assessments, actions taken, and outcomes of the investigations.

If any exemptions are applied, please provide a detailed explanation of the exemptions used and consider the release of as much information as possible in line with the public interest test.

I would appreciate it if this request could be processed promptly, and I look forward to receiving your response within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days.

Thank you for your assistance.

Yours sincerely,

Jeremy Beakind

Dear team,

I am unsure of the timeframe of these incidents, but as they are identified by a specific unique identifying reference, these should be retrievable from your incident management system.

Yours sincerely,

Jeremy Beakind

Dear The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust,

Thank you for your response to my FOI request concerning incident reports INC150227 and INC152492, as well as other incidents involving "Physician Associate" or "Anaesthesia Associate." I acknowledge your application of Section 40 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, citing concerns about personal identifiability even with redaction. While I understand the importance of protecting personal data, I respectfully challenge the blanket application of Section 40 in this context for the following reasons:

1. Anonymisation and Public Interest

Applicability of Section 40: Section 40 does not apply if the information can be effectively anonymised. Redacting personal identifiers such as names, dates of birth, and specific times is a standard practice that allows for the disclosure of information while safeguarding individual privacy. It is unclear why such redaction would not suffice in this case.

Public Interest Test: The public has a legitimate interest in understanding how safety-critical incidents are investigated, especially those involving relatively new healthcare roles like Physician Associates and Anaesthesia Associates. Transparency in these matters is essential for maintaining public confidence in patient safety. Releasing anonymised information about safety assessments, actions taken, and investigation outcomes does not compromise personal data when proper redaction is applied.

2. Specificity of the Request and Anonymisation

Incident Reference Numbers: While the request includes specific incident reference numbers, this should not automatically lead to refusal. Internally identifiable references do not inherently compromise patient or staff confidentiality if identifying information is appropriately redacted.

3. Recent Developments and Public Interest

Independent Review Announcement: On 20 November 2024, the Health and Social Care Secretary, Wes Streeting, announced an independent review of Physician Associates (PAs) and Anaesthesia Associates (AAs) to assess their deployment across the health system and ensure the highest standards of patient care.

Relevance to the Review: The information requested is pertinent to this review, as it pertains to incidents involving PAs and AAs. Providing anonymised details of these incidents would contribute valuable insights into the safety and effectiveness of these roles, directly informing the ongoing review.

4. Commitment to Appeal

Timeliness and Accountability: While I appreciate the statutory timeframe for FOI responses, I am committed to pursuing this matter due to its significance. If my request continues to be refused, I intend to appeal to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), as the information is crucial for the independent review and the broader public interest.

Request for Internal Review

I respectfully request an internal review of your decision to withhold the requested information under Section 40. Please reconsider the possibility of releasing anonymised versions of the reports, focusing on safety assessments, actions taken, and outcomes, which are unlikely to contain personal data. If you uphold the refusal, I request a detailed explanation of:

-The specific reasons anonymisation cannot be applied.
-Why the public interest test does not favour disclosure in this case.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your response.

Yours faithfully,

Jeremy Beakind