Freedom of Information Request – Ref: FOI 063-2025
Thank you for your recent Freedom of Information request. Please find our response below.
You asked:
– Please provide Electro Convulsive Treatment (ECT) information under the FOI act to the following questions:
1. Please supply patient’s information ECT leaflet
Our response:
Please see the link below:
ECT Booklet for patients and carers
You asked:
2. Please supply patient ECT consent form
Our response:
Please see pages 3-5 in the Care pathway booklet below:
You asked
3. Please supply any ECT reports/investigations
Our response:
Pleas see pages 6-11 in the Care pathway booklet below:
You asked:
4. How many ECT in 2024?
Our response:
Total of 414 sessions delivered for 42 patients
You asked:
5. What proportion of patients were men/women?
Our response:
Men: 13
Women: 29
You asked:
6. How old were they?
Our response:
Old age (60 and above): 29 patients
Middle age (45-59): 5 patients
Adult (26-44): 8 patients
You asked:
7. What proportion of patients were classified people of the global majority or racialised communities (“POC / BAME”)?
Our response:
All were White -British
You asked:
8. How many people covered by the equality act – specific protected characteristics – excluding age + gender – received ECT?
Our response:
Not applicable
You asked:
9. How many people were offered talking therapy prior to ECT?
Our response:
Not applicable
You asked:
10. How many were receiving ECT for the first time?
Our response:
13 patients
You asked:
11. How many patients consented to ECT?
Our response:
28 patients
You asked:
12. How many ECT complaints were investigated outside the NHS?
Our response:
The Trust does not hold the information requested
You asked:
13. How many patients died during or 1 month after ECT and what was the cause (whether or not ECT was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
14. How many patients died within 6 months after ECT and what was the cause (whether or not ECT was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
15. How many patients died by suicide within 6 months of receiving ECT (whether or not ECT was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
16. How many patients have suffered complications during and after ECT and what were those complications?
Our response:
None
You asked:
17. Have there been any formal complaints from patients/relatives about ECT?
Our response:
One
You asked:
18. If so, what was their concerns?
Our response:
The patient complained about being discouraged from having ECT
You asked:
19. How many patients report memory loss/loss of cognitive function?
Our response:
None
You asked:
20. What tests are used to assess memory loss/loss of cognitive function?
Our response:
Montreal Cognitive Assessment ( MOCA)
You asked:
21. Have MRI or CT scans been used before and after ECT?
Our response:
We do not use MRI or CT scans that have been used before and after ECT, unless otherwise there is a specific indication
You asked:
22. If so, what was the conclusion?
Our response:
Not applicable
You asked:
23. How does the Trust plan to prevent ECT in the future?
Our response:
The Trust has no plan to prevent ECT in the future
You asked:
– Please provide restraints information under the FOI act to the following questions:
1. Please supply any restraints/investigations
Our response:
Please see the link below:
You asked:
2. How many restraints 2024?
Our response:
3,025
You asked:
3. What proportion of patients were men/women?
Our response:
Female: 58.28%
Male: 36.49%
Not Known: 3.62%
Not Recorded: 1.58%
You asked:
4. How old were they?
Our response:
| Under 1 year | 0 |
| 1-10 years | 8 |
| 11-17 years | 98 |
| 18-29 years | 1053 |
| 30-39 years | 664 |
| 40-49 years | 286 |
| 50-59 years | 269 |
| 60-69 years | 355 |
| 70-79 years | 166 |
| 80+ years | 113 |
| Not recorded | 13 |
You asked:
5. What proportion of patients were classified people of the global majority or racialised communities (“POC / BAME”)?
Our response:
White British, English, Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish: 76.63%
Other ethnicities: 11.17%
Not known: 10.62%
Not recorded: 1.58%
You asked:
6. How many people covered by the equality act – specific protected characteristics – excluding age + gender – were restrained?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
7. How many restraints were investigated outside the NHS?
Our response:
The Trust does not hold the information requested
You asked:
8. How many patients died during or 1 month after restraints and what was the cause (whether or not restraints was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
9. How many patients died within 6 months after restraints and what was the cause (whether or not restraints was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
10. How many patients died by suicide within 6 months of receiving restraints (whether or not restraints was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
11. How many patients have suffered complications during and after restraints and what were those complications?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
12. Have there been any formal complaints from patients/relatives about restraints?
Our response:
Yes, three
You asked:
13. If so, what was their concerns?
Our response:
The patient’s father complained that his son had been restrained whilst attempting to leave the hospital, despite being an informal patient.
The patient’s partner complained that the patient had been held in a prone restraint and felt that de-escalation techniques could have been used.
The patient complained that he was restrained by two members of the staff, which cause him pain and left him frightened to leave his room.
You asked:
14. Are counts of forced injections available? if so how many people were forcible injected?
Our response:
Yes, 799
You asked:
15. How does the Trust plan to reduce restraints in the future?
Our response:
The Trust understands that during the provision of safe effective support for people who may at times present with distressed behaviour, clinical practices that may be described as restrictive may occur. However, the Trust is committed to working in collaboration with those who use services to provide the least restrictive care, with a focus for improving quality of life and recovery.
A Trust wide programme of reducing restrictive practice is overseen by the Positive & Safe Group. This is a multidisciplinary group that includes people with lived experience of using the Trust services. The duties of the Positive & Safe Group are as follows:
- To agree Quality Improvement plans spanning the reduction of restrictive practices and suicide prevention and its implementation in practice, and any subsequent review
- To support and set clear expectations and objectives for the Positive and Safe Champions to enable them to be positive agents of change
- To ensure that the Datix Incident Form (DIF1) is fit for purpose, user friendly, and captures all defined incidents with reliability
- To advise on the format of patient safety incident reports to improve learning from reported episodes of restrictive interventions, ligature incidents, self-harm incidents and sexual safety incidents
- To identify key emerging themes and feed this into development of policy, and potential for research projects
- To advise on the development, review and revision of associated policies and procedures
- To continually review training provision and ensure legislation and guidance are embedded into training delivery and practice
- To Identify and share best practice across the trust
- To agree the de-brief process for both service users and staff when incidents occur
- To ensure clinical audit activity regarding physical interventions and rapid tranquillisation for the purpose of assurance
- To develop organisational strategies in regard of reducing restrictive interventions, inpatient suicide prevention and sexual safety
- To ensure that there is learning from reported events and ability to share learning into other groups, including the patient safety group, and learning from incidents group.
Our PARRI training programme is certified by BILD ACT and complies fully with all standards set out by the Restraint Reduction Network, which fundamentally promotes the reduction in the range of restrictive interventions.
You asked:
16. How many of these restraints were face down restraints?
Our response:
10
You asked:
– Please provide seclusion information under the FOI act to the following questions:
1. Please supply any seclusion reports/investigations
Our response:
Please see the link below:
You asked:
2. How many seclusions 2024?
Our response:
2
You asked:
3. What proportion of patients were men/women?
Our response:
Male 100%
You asked:
4. How old were they?
Our response:
11 to 17 years
You asked:
5. What proportion of patients were classified people of the global majority or racialised communities (“POC / BAME”)?
Our response:
100%
You asked:
6. How many people covered by the equality act – specific protected characteristics – excluding age + gender – were secluded?
Our response:
2
You asked:
7. How many seclusions were investigated outside the NHS?
Our response:
The Trust does not hold the information requester
You asked:
8. How many patients died during or 1 month after seclusion and what was the cause (whether or not seclusion was considered the cause)?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
9. How many patients died within 6 months after seclusion and what was the cause (whether or not seclusion was considered the cause)?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
10. How many patients died by suicide within 6 months of receiving seclusion (whether or not seclusion was considered the cause)?
Our response:
Zero
You asked:
11. How many patients have suffered complications during and after seclusion and what were those complications?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
12. Have there been any formal complaints from patients/relatives about seclusion?
Our response:
No
You asked:
13. If so, what was their concerns?
Our response:
Not applicable
You asked:
14. How does the Trust plan to reduce seclusions in the future?
Our response:
The trust actively avoids using seclusion; however, in some clinical areas such as LD inpatient setting the option remains and is only used in exceptional circumstances for example when interactions with the service user have become counter therapeutic and staff need to withdraw to prevent further escalation. The service user is always monitored using CCTV. With regards to the PICU and Montpellier, they occasionally use the Extra Care Area (ECA) for segregation; however, this is for therapeutic purposes, and the service user is never left alone (always at least 1 or 2 members of staff in the room with the individual).
– Please provide medication errors information under the FOI act to the following questions:
You asked:
1. Please supply any medication errors reports/investigations
Our response:
Please see the link below:
Medication error listing report
2. How many medication errors in 2024?
Our response:
819
You asked:
3. What proportion of patients were men/women?
Female: 52.57%
Male: 42.72%
Not known: 0.97%
Not recorded: 3.74%
You asked:
4. How old were they?
Our response:
| Under 1 year | 3 |
| 1 to 10 years | 9 |
| 11 to 17 years | 13 |
| 18 to 29 years | 40 |
| 30 to 39 years | 34 |
| 40 to 49 years | 52 |
| 50 to 59 years | 57 |
| 60 to 69 years | 76 |
| 70 to 79 years | 201 |
| 80 + years | 279 |
| Not recorded or medication incident did not involve a patient | 55 |
You asked:
5. What proportion of patients were classified people of the global majority or racialised communities (“POC / BAME”)?
Our response:
White British, English, Welsh, Scottish or Northern Irish: 80.03%
Other ethnicities: 4.99%
Not known: 10.96%
Not recorded or medication incident did not involve a patient: 4.02%
You asked:
6. How many people covered by the equality act – specific protected characteristics – excluding age + gender – endured medication errors ?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question
You asked:
7. How many medication errors were investigated outside the NHS ?
Our response:
We do not hold the information requested
You asked:
8. How many patients died during or 1 month after medication errors and what was the cause (whether or not medication errors was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question.
You asked:
9. How many patients died within 6 months after medication errors and what was the cause (whether or not medication errors was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question.
You asked:
10. How many patients died by suicide within 6 months of receiving medication errors (whether or not medication errors was considered the cause)?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question.
You asked:
11. How many patients have suffered complications during and after medication errors and what were those complications?
Our response:
We do not record or report on information in a way that would enable us to provide a response to this question.
You asked:
12. Have there been any formal complaints from patients/relatives about medication errors?
Our response:
Twelve
You asked:
13. If so, what was their concerns?
Our response:
Patient complained that a nurse failed to report medication errors
Daughter of patient complained that syringe driver kept alarming, which was found to be incompatibility of two medications that caused crystallisation when mixed
Patient complained that they were discharged without an adequate supply of medication
Patient complained that his medication was causing mini strokes
Patient complained that she was given one dose of medication twice
Parents complained that the patient was given more medication than prescribed
Parent of patient complained that his medications were prescribed despite paradoxical reactions
Joint complaint with Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust regarding administration of Parkinson’s medication not being given at set times
Mother complained that patient’s medication was managed badly
Mother complained that daughter had been discharged without appropriate medication
Daughter of deceased patient complained that nurses had not administered medication in a timely manner
Mother complained that patient had been given wrong dose of epilepsy medication
You asked:
14. How does the Trust plan to prevent medication errors in the future?
Our response:
The Trust has in place the following:
Medication management e-learning
Incident review
Shared learning from incidents
Medicines optimisation governance framework
Medication error and incident management clinical policy
Next steps:
Should you have any queries in relation to our response, please do not hesitate to contact us. If you are unhappy with the response you have received in relation to your request and wish to ask us to review our response, you should write to:
Louise Moss
Head of Legal Services / Associate Director of Corporate Governance
c/o Gloucestershire Health and Care NHS Foundation Trust
Edward Jenner Court
1010 Pioneer Avenue
Gloucester Business Park
Brockworth, GL3 4AW
E-mail: louise.moss@ghc.nhs.uk
If you are not content with the outcome of any review, you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) for further advice/guidance. Generally, the ICO will not consider your case unless you have exhausted your enquiries with the Trust which should include considering the use of the Trust’s formal complaints procedure. The ICO can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire SK9 5AF.