Threen House Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained good.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider assessed and planned for people’s needs. They regularly met with people and their families to discuss how they wanted to be cared for and their individual needs. They consulted with external professionals to develop personalised care plans. Care plans were reviewed and updated. Care plans included clear guidance for staff.

Staff provided evidence-based care and treatment. Staff undertook a range of training relevant to their roles and to help them understand about best practice when caring for people who were living with dementia. The registered manager held meetings with staff to ensure they learnt together. The registered manager kept staff up to date with changes in guidance or legislation. Relatives told us the staff provided suitable care to meet people’s needs. Their comments included, “Staff cater for each individual and their needs. They definitely know what they are doing” and “[Staff] manage situations well. There can be challenges supporting [person] but we discuss this with the staff, and they know how to deal with different situations.”

The registered manager and nurses had a good understanding of people’s complex needs and worked with other professionals to make sure these were met.

Staff worked well with each other to share information and provide good continuity of care. There were systems to share information and update staff about changes in people’s condition or health. The provider worked closely with external professionals. Relatives told us they thought the staff worked well as a team and communicated effectively with them. Their comments included, “Staff work collaboratively with us” and “We can always talk with the staff and [registered manager].”

The provider supported people to live healthy lives. People’s healthcare needs were assessed. The registered manager recorded these in care plans and gave guidance to staff about how to meet people’s needs. There was always a nurse on duty who monitored people’s health, skin condition and wellbeing. Staff worked closely with external professionals to ensure healthcare needs were met. They made timely referrals and asked for support and guidance from others when needed. We saw recommendations from healthcare professionals were included within care plans and followed.

Staff monitored people’s weight, nutrition and hydration. The provider made sure people’s specialist dietary requirements were met and people had enough to eat and drink.

People using the service and relatives explained they were happy with how the staff supported them with their health. They confirmed they were able to see doctors and other specialists when needed. A relative told us that the staff were prompt to respond when people became unwell.

Staff monitored people’s wellbeing and outcomes. They kept records about the care they had provided and made observations about people’s health and wellbeing. The electronic care planning system alerted the registered manager if there were concerns. For example, if someone had not drunk enough or if a care need had not been met. The registered manager regularly reviewed people’s care plans and updated these when their needs changed.

The provider sought people’s consent. People told us staff offered choices and obtained their consent before providing care. We saw staff doing this and using appropriate language and methods of communication to help make sure people understood choices.

The provider assessed people’s capacity to consent to different decisions. They reassessed the information at regular intervals to ensure any changes in people’s mental capacity were identified. Care plans included information about people’s mental capacity.

The provider consulted with people and their families when developing care plans. They met with relatives and people’s representatives, including advocates, to discuss care in people’s best interests when people could not make decisions themselves. Relatives confirmed this.