So a few things that stood out to me from the link-https://lucyletbyinnocence.com/leaks/op_hummingbird_leaks.pdf
which oftenaddled thinks isn't the least bit damning to Lucy Letby. Ok then.
Here the consultants are going through their concerns (I'll just post a few)-
SB - of those 9 we reviewed initially, 6/9 collapsed between 000-0400, which was highly unusual. One of the action was to review the period prior and nothing was found (will share these reviewed) that review also noticed a significant number of collapses. SB - following on from that thematic we discussed the nurse (Lucy) but no action taken. I shared the report with IH prior to the COC inspection (Feb) at this time the nurse had been put on day shifts for mentoring reasons
Q: Confirm how many that Nurse has been present?
SB - the nurse was present in all but one of the deaths
Q: if third party involvement would you expect to see the same indicator?
SB - it is relatively easy to manipulate fluid, to administer drugs and or too block an airway
SB - there seems to be a theme with multiple births (triplets & twins) and the more stable infant being the one to collapse
SH - case of Baby [I&S] twins, 1 twin was on CPAP — but baby [I&S] (not needing any respiratory support) was the one that collapsed, from clinical perspective neither were anticipated to collapse but clinically the one on respiratory support was more vulnerable
SB- to put in perspective consultant who joined us from Crewe, he has never experienced anything like this in 5 years as consultant
RJ - we all have concerns, nothing significant changed over the years to explain the deaths e.g. the changes in patient numbers, staffing, do not explain the number of deaths or collapses.
SB - survival rate for babies over 32 is nearly 100%, for 6 of our babies to have died who were over 32 weeks, to die is not right.
There is an association with a member of staff who was present during the majority of instances when the babies unexpectedly deteriorated. When this member of staff was put onto day shifts for 3 months, no sudden collapses occurred during the night. Previous to this change in her work pattern, in 6 out of 9 deaths, the arrests occurred between 0000 and 0400. When this member of staff was no longer working on the unit (July 2016- present), there have been no neonatal deaths on the unit and no unexpected or unexplained sudden deteriorations. This member of staff was present on the unit during the deterioration of the [X] Children who died (Child A, C, D, E, I&S, I&S, Child I, I&S, I&S, Child O and Child P).
The gestation at birth of the babies who died was between 27 weeks and 40 weeks. 6 babies were >32 weeks gestation. The redesignation of the unit from July 2016 (only permitted to care for babies >32 weeks gestation) cannot therefore be the only reason why there have been no deaths or sudden unexplained deteriorations of babies on the unit since July 2016.
Then this from John Gibbs I think-
Initially, we felt Lucy was just unlucky in happening to be involved in more of these infants than other nurses but this association become steadily more worrying especially with recurrent sudden collapses at night that stopped when Lucy was moved off nights and then, on one occasion (only that I'm aware of), when Lucy covered a stable infant during a colleague's coffee break during which that infant unexpectedly collapsed.