Peninsula Hub Also known as Peninsula Ultrasound Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We looked for evidence that people and communities were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of people and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that people could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

Description: We make sure people are at the centre of their care and treatment choices and we decide, in partnership with them, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

3. We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Staff worked to coordinate people's involvement with families and carers, particularly for those with long-term conditions. For example, all patients we spoke with we told us they could bring someone with them for support, especially following invasive scans.

The service offered limited weekend services and provided a scan list on Saturdays at the main peninsula hub location.

There were quiet areas or examination rooms where patients could wait if they found busy environments distressing. However, the whole clinic, although small, was calm and composed which patients and staff described as wonderful.

People had timely access to initial assessment, test results, and diagnosis. People told us they could access care and treatment at a time to suit them.

Appointments were only cancelled or delayed only when necessary and explained to people. Those cancelled were supported to access care and treatment again as soon as possible.

Where possible, the service scheduled several investigations together, and administrative staff proactively reviewed lists to ensure no duplication or split appointments.

Services provided reflected the needs of the population served and they ensured flexibility, choice and continuity of care. Patient feedback contributed to improvements such as online travel information.

Staff communicated with people, so they understood their care, treatment and condition and any advice given. Telephone translation services were available if needed. However, there were no written materials or emails available in any other format or language other than English.

Staff supported people to access additional services such as advocacy and support groups to improve their choices of care.

People told us they could access care and treatment at a time to suit them. Services ran on time and people were kept informed if there was any disruption.

Service users told us they were offered a choice of appointments and there were some same day appointments available if needed for urgent requests. Patients also told us they had been offered scans at a variety of locations around Cornwall.

People’s carers, advocates and representatives including family members and friends, were identified, welcomed, and treated as important partners in the delivery of their care. Patients were always given the option of having a carer or loved one accompany them so long as this complied with workplace safety.

Description: We understand the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

3. We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Managers reviewed the demands of patients using the service and made arrangement to meet changes in demand. Additional staff had been recruited to accommodate an increasing number of referrals.

There were arrangements for on the day urgent scans which were reported by either the scanning sonographer or a radiologist available remotely at the nearby NHS trust. This meant patients could receive scan results on the same day.

People with mental health, living with a learning disability, autism or dementia needs could get extra support when they attended for their examinations or procedures and in most cases, staff were aware of additional needs in advance.

Description: We provide appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that we tailor to individual needs.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

2. We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff provided people who used services with information emails to explain their diagnostic test both before and after their appointment, but these were not available in any other language than English.

Service leaders ensured lessons were learned when there were data security breaches, and the service had a comprehensive information governance policy. Data showed 84% of diagnostic imaging staff had completed information governance (data security awareness) mandatory training. Information governance was a standing agenda item on manger meetings, and there had not been any breaches in the 12 months prior to our assessment.

Staff had access to communication aids to help patients become partners in their care and treatment. Staff used patients’ preferred methods of communication, such as phone calls, although emails were favoured in the first instance.

Description: We make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. We involve them in decisions about their care and tell them what’s changed as a result.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

3. We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

People’s views and experiences were gathered and acted on to shape and improve the services and culture, which included people in a range of equality groups. People who used services, those close to them and their representatives were actively engaged and involved in decision-making. The service had links with local NHS trust and integrated care board (ICB).

There were collaborative relationships with external partners to build a shared understanding of challenges within the system. This also included understanding the needs of the relevant population, and to deliver services to meet those needs. For example, the introduction of post-menopausal scanning clinics at the request of the local NHS trust.

Managers were transparent and open with all stakeholders about the performance of the service and had regular contract meetings and performance reviews, although this was centred around capacity and report turnaround and quality.

People were supported if they needed to complain, and managers viewed complaints as valuable feedback and opportunities to learn and improve. There was support available to assist patients with sensory loss or communication difficulties to make complaints. There had been 4 complaints made about the service in the past 6 months. We saw complaint trackers recorded actions taken as well as if duty of candour had been applied. However, investigations were not always thorough. We saw one investigation undertaken following a reporting error. There was no evidence or actions recorded in the investigation which was very brief and simplistic. This meant the service could not be assured the sonographer who undertook the scan had made any changes to their practice to prevent future discrepancies.

Description: We make sure that everyone can access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

2. We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Services provided mostly reflected the needs of the population served and they ensured flexibility, choice and continuity of care. The service was proactive in ensuring they provided access for all patients where they could. However, managers explained the layout of the clinic was not suitable for patients who could not transfer to the ultrasound bed independently. But they had not taken definitive steps to ensure non ambulant patients were not referred to the clinic as staff were not trained in manual handling so could not assist them. We were also told of a patient who had attended and been in too much pain to get out of their vehicle.

The service ran 6 days a week, scanning on Saturdays as well as in the week, which staff explained suited working age people well. Managers made provision for some same day appointments to be available for those who needed them.

Overall, performance against the 6-week standard had improved over the past 12 months, ranging between 3 weeks to 13 weeks. Waiting times were monitored against each satellite location, and staff explained that patients for non-urgent scans often elected to wait for a slot in a clinic close to them, even if it meant waiting slightly longer.

Information was provided to service users via email before appointments, including contact details, hospital map and directions, and information about any preparation required.

The service did not have a hearing loop for those patients with hearing impairment or loss.

Description: We actively seek out and listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. We tailor the care, support and treatment in response to this.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

3. We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff within the service promoted a culture in which the people using the service felt empowered to give their views.

The provider had undertaken equality impact assessments of their policies and procedures to ensure they did not place vulnerable people or people with protected characteristics at a disadvantage.

Not all staff were trained in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights. Only 68% of staff had undertaken this training.

The service communicated its values and minimum standards of care people could expect to receive. Managers took steps to include all patients and were engaging with the local NHS trust and integrated care board. This included minority communities such as transgender groups in respect of inclusive pregnancy checking and non-gender toilet facilities.

Staff used translation services for patients whose first language was not English.

Description: We support people to plan for important life changes, so they can have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Quality Statement Score: Your judgement of the quality and safety of the topic area

3. We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff assessed patients’ needs and communicated this with health professionals using booking forms and patient records. These included choices patients had made about how they would like to be treated. For example, patients’ choice about resuscitation if they became very unwell.

Test results were provided in a timely way which were necessary for some types of scans and staff provided information about support groups, including a post menopausal bleeding information leaflet.

Patients felt they understood information staff provided and had time to consider their options.