In infants coming to post-mortem, histopathology is more sensitive than SS for the detection of clinically significant fractures. In children suspected of non-accidental injuries but with negative or equivocal SS, sampling of the anterior and posterior end of ribs 5-8 and the bones around the knee for histological examination could reveal clinically unsuspected fractures and significant evidence of physical abuse. 71% of infants showed evidence of old fractures typical of non-accidental injury.

Aims This study is the first to systematically document histological features of fractures of known age in infants (≦12 months). It has been used to develop a tabulated database specifically to guide histopathologists to age fractures in children considered to have suffered accidental or non‐accidental injury ( NAI ). Currently in the United Kingdom there are insufficient pathologists with experience in histological ageing of fractures to meet the medicolegal need for this examination. This study provides a practical tool that will allow those skilled paediatric and forensic pathologists currently involved in assessing infants for evidence of accidental or non‐accidental injury a basis for extending their assessment into this area of unmet need. Methods and results One hundred and sixty‐nine fractures of known age at death were obtained from 52 anonymised infants over a period of 32 years (1985–2016 inclusive). Sections stained using haematoxylin and eosin (H&E) and Martius scarlet blue ( MSB ) were used to identify specific histological features and to relate them to fracture age. In 1999 the data were entered into a tabulated database for fractures accumulated between from 1985 to 1998 inclusive. Thereafter cases were added, and at 2‐yearly intervals the accumulated data were audited against the previous database and adjustments made. Conclusions This paper describes the final data set from the 2017 audit. The study was terminated at the end of 2016, as there had been no material changes in the data set for three consecutive audits.

AimsThe main aim of this audit was to look at documentation in medication charts in an acute mixed inpatient unit in South Manchester. In addition, we also looked at completion of capacity assessment and consent to treatment forms as appropriate.BackgroundSafe prescription, administration and monitoring of medication is key to effective patient care. Due to the busy nature of inpatient hospital wards, errors do unfortunately occur both with the medications, and with the recording of their administration.We will use a data collection tool to collect data as per standards described in our local GMMH policy. The medication chart will be used as the standard, as this is the current chart that is in use in the Trust.MethodData were collected from 31 medication charts for inpatients admitted in the ward between the 5/12/19 to 18/12/19. We captured data from each page of the medication chart that required a record to be made by any staff, including details of prescribing, administration and pharmacist checks. Data were recorded as either Yes/No or NA (Not Applicable). Data were then summarised and analysed using MS excel.ResultOf the 31 patients, 22 (71%) had a capacity assessment form completed and 16 (52%) had a consent to treatment form completed. From the data analysis, it was clear that there are high rates of completion for the ‘essential’ parts of all prescriptions, including medicine name, dose, route and data. ‘Route’ was only recorded for 40% of prescriptions for depot medicines. Details of the administration of a medicine by a nurse was generally well-completed. For as required medications, all information relating to administration (date, time, dose and given by) were fully completed for 100% of prescriptions. For regular prescriptions however, the administration details were not as well-completed, where date of administration was recorded in 84% of prescriptions and signature in 29% of prescriptions. Unique patient identifiers are well-recorded on Page 1 of the prescription chart, though not maintained throughout the prescription chart. Nature of reaction to an allergy or sensitivity was only recorded in 6 of the 21 patients (29%).ConclusionOverall, there were good completion rates for the mandatory parts of the prescriptions. However improvements could be made for prescriptions as well as administration and pharmacy checks. The capacity assessment and consent to treatment forms could be improved upon too. We plan to put the recommendations and re-audit in 3-6 months’ time.