You are here

Archived: Woodthorpe Hospital

Reports


Inspection carried out on 13 February 2014

During a routine inspection

We spoke with five patients who used the service, three relatives and 11 members of staff. We also reviewed four medical records.

All the records we reviewed demonstrated clearly that the care had been discussed with the patient using the service. We saw patients signed to consent to their treatment.

We saw that patients were seen as outpatients prior to admission. During these clinic appointments multi-disciplinary pre admission assessments were undertaken. We saw documentation for patients which showed us that consultants, nurses and allied health professionals were involved in patient�s care.

We saw there was a process for identifying staff who were approaching the date for their training or were out of date with their training. This demonstrated that the provider monitored staff development and training attendance and was able to follow up non-attendance.

We saw a selection of comment cards completed by patients. All rated their care as good or excellent. We were also told that an external patient satisfaction survey had been conducted.

We found the medical records and daily records we reviewed were up to date, accurate and fit for purpose. Documentation was complete, detailed and easy to follow. We saw that records were secure and either locked in a filing cabinets, trolleys or within a locked office.

Inspection carried out on 4 October 2012

During a routine inspection

Patients told us they were asked for consent before any treatment was carried out. They also told us they were well cared for and received good care in accordance with their needs. They were happy with the premises and that the staff were competent within their role. Patients told us that the complaints procedure was available, it was understood and well-publicised.

We found that the provider was following appropriate consent procedures and providing appropriate care. The premises were well maintained and the provider was making appropriate checks before a new member of staff started work. The provider was investigating and responding to complaints appropriately.

Inspection carried out on 26 March 2012

During a routine inspection

Patients told us that they had been given relevant information before they had decided to go ahead with an operation. They had also been given relevant information, followed by an opportunity to ask questions, at a pre-operation assessment meeting.

Patients told us that they were unsure if there was a care plan for them and they confirmed they had not seen it nor been asked to sign it. However, they told us they had been involved in the care planning process and had been kept well informed. One patient said, �There�s a personal touch, they have time to discuss my care with me.� Another patient said, �The staff are very attentive, always asking you if you�re OK or got any concerns or anything you need.�

Patients told us they had not been asked by the hospital to give feedback about the quality of the services received. They were unclear what the procedure would be if they wanted to make a complaint or to raise any issues; instead they relied on speaking informally with the ward staff. However, all patients told us they had no complaints to make. One patient said, �I would tell someone I suppose, but I haven�t had any complaints up to now.�

Patients were very positive about the care received. One patient said, �This place is like a finely tuned car, everything works well.� Another patient said, �The care has been second to none.� One patient told us that they had not been prompted to eat following an operation. However, when they rang their buzzer to request food, their meal was immediately available.

Patients compared this hospital to others in Nottingham and felt that this hospital was better. One patient said, �Why can�t it always be like it is here?�

Patients told us they felt safe staying at the hospital. When asked if they felt the care they received was safe one patient said �absolutely�. When asked what they would do if they had any worries a patient said, �I would just report it to any of the staff.�

We asked patients about cleanliness and they were all very satisfied. A patient said, �The cleanliness is very good.� Another patient said, �The cleaner did my bathroom very well.�

We also asked patients about the maintenance of the hospital. Some patients who were staying in refurbished rooms were very satisfied. Others, who were staying in rooms that had not been refurbished, felt their rooms needed improving; one patient said, �It needs redecorating.�

We asked patients if there were enough staff to meet their needs and they all said that there were. One patient said, �On Saturday a whole load of new patients came onto the ward but the staff coped fine.� Patients told us that staff responded quickly when the call bell was used. One patient said, �Yes there�s enough staff. You never feel you�re taking someone away from another patient.�

Patients told us that staff seemed well trained and able to do their job properly. A patient said, �Very much so. A year ago I stayed at [another hospital in Nottingham] and there were things I didn�t get told like when to take my tablets. But here there�s none of that.� Another patient said, �The care is excellent, very caring, competent and efficient, no messing around, but friendly.�

As noted in outcome 1, patients told us they had not been asked by the hospital to give feedback about the quality of the services received. They were unclear what the procedure would be if they wanted to make a complaint or to raise any issues; instead they relied on speaking informally with the ward staff. However, patients were all very happy with the care provided. One patient said, �I wouldn�t want to change anything.� Another patient said, �It was very good.�

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)