Psychiatric And Psychological Consultant Services 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

The service was responsive to people’s feedback. People spoke very highly about how they were involved in decisions about their care. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it.

The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. The provider understood the needs of their patients and could offer appointments out of hours and on Saturdays in response to requests from patients for flexible appointment times. Since making the decision to remain a remote service, following the Covid pandemic restrictions, many patients enjoyed the increased flexibility this gave them, and ease of access for those with disabilities, although some missed the face-to-face experience.

Patient information was shared appropriately with other services, for example when patients were referred to in-patient mental health services. People were given support to make informed decisions about their future plans and informed of other services that might be helpful to them.

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.

The service aimed to ensure that people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. They made decisions in partnership with patients, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. The service’s flexible, person-centred approach demonstrated a commitment to inclusivity and responsiveness.

A review of clinical records showed patients were consistently supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. Patients we spoke with confirmed that they were involved in decisions about their care.

The provider understood the needs of their patients and could offer appointments out of

hours and on Saturdays in response to requests from patients for flexible appointment times.

Since making the decision to remain a remote service, following the Covid pandemic restrictions, many patients enjoyed the increased flexibility this gave them, and ease of access for those with disabilities, although some missed the face-to-face experience.

Patient information was shared appropriately with other services, for example when patients were referred to in-patient mental health services.

Staff wrote and managed electronic and hand-written care and treatment records in line with professional standards. Care and treatment records were stored safely and securely. Staff could easily find information in the electronic records.

The service was registered with the information commissioner’s office as appropriate. The service had access to interpreter services if needed. Patients were informed as to how to access their personal records. Video calls used for assessments and other consultations were not recorded.

The service enabled people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service had a complaints policy and procedures in place. Patients told us they were given information about how to make a complaint or raise concerns. We saw that complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

Patients told us that waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and managed appropriately. Most said that the appointment system was easy to use.

The service ensured people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The service did not provide crisis or out of hours arrangements, with patients directed to contact emergency services when needed.

Patients had timely access assessment and treatment. There was no waiting list. The service aimed to respond very quickly to new referrals and could offer appointments within 48 hours of referral and then immediately plan and deliver treatment. Patients told us that waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and they could usually arrange appointments for when it suited them.

The service was seeing approximately 4000 clients per year. The service was for adults and assessments for children over the age of 15. There were 3 CAMHS (child and adolescents mental health service) psychiatrists. Referrals were received from several sources including GPs and other mental health professionals. Some patients self-referred to the service. Patients were responsible for funding their treatment either directly or through health insurance.

The management team looked at barriers to care, support and treatment, and were aware that online services were not suitable for all clients. They had developed clear suitability criteria for those who were appropriate. They were working hard to recruit more clinicians to provide specialised mental health assessments, treatment, and psychotherapy on an out-patient basis.

Treatment options provided included psychiatric care, cognitive behavioural therapy, and individual psychotherapy. Psychiatric and psychological assessments were available for forensic, personal injury, and medicolegal cases, education and development, and second opinions.

They aimed for clinicians to type up their notes on every appointment within 24 hours and send out a letter to each patient’s GP within 72 hours of a consultation.

People were given support to make informed decisions about their future plans and informed of other services that might be helpful to them.