You are here

Woodbourne Priory Hospital Good

We are carrying out a review of quality at Woodbourne Priory Hospital. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 30 May 2018

We did not rate The Manor at this inspection. We inspected Woodbourne Priory Hospital on 20-22 June 2017 and gave an overall rating for the hospital. The Manor was not opened until August 2017, therefore we will inspect and rate the ward at our next comprehensive inspection of Woodbourne Priory Hospital.  

On this inspection, we found that:

  • There were sufficient numbers of skilled staff available on the ward for patients to access. There was good access to medical cover 24/7. Staff showed good knowledge of safeguarding and had a clear line of governance for reporting concerns. 
  • Staff carried out environmental risk assessments of the ward area daily. Patients had individual risk assessments and detailed contingency plans in place in the case of emergencies. 
  • Patients had detailed care plans in place and were aware of and in agreement with their therapy programme. The service offered a comprehensive therapy programme that offered therapies recommended by The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. 
  • Staff learned from incidents and the provider ensured learning from other areas of the service was shared. 
  • All patients we spoke with were positive about their treatment and their experiences on the ward. 
  • Staff knew who their senior managers were and told us they could raise concerns if needed and would be supported to do so. There were opportunities for staff to develop. Staff morale on the ward was good. 

However:

  • The ward did not have a designated room for patients to see visitors with children. This was not in line with Priory policy and a potential safeguarding risk.
  • Nursing staff were not given guidance on what order they should administer as needed (PRN) medication. This meant that they may not have issued PRN medication in the order intended by the prescribing consultant. 
  • There was no documented admission criteria and no standard operating procedure available at the time of inspection.
  • Not all staff were specially trained or showed good knowledge of identifying risks in treatment and detoxification for substance misuse. Less than half of the ward staff had been trained in this area at the time of inspection. Recent changes in leadership of the hospital had led to a delay in organising specialist training.

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 30 May 2018

We did not rate safe at this inspection.

On this inspection, we found that:

  • The ward did not have a designated room for patients to see visitors with children. This was not in line with Priory policy and a potential safeguarding risk.
  • Nursing staff were not given guidance on what order they should administer as needed (PRN) medication. This meant that they may not have issued PRN medication in the order intended by the prescribing consultant.

However:

  • The ward environment was visibly clean and areas well maintained in good condition. Staff carried out regular checks of the environment and took action regarding outstanding issues. 
  • Staff monitored fridge and clinic room temperatures and ensured medications were stored safely. They had access to emergency medication if required. 
  • There were sufficient numbers of skilled staff available on the ward for patients to access. There was good access to medical cover 24/7. 
  • Compliance with mandatory training was good at 83%.
  • Staff showed learning from incidents and the provider routinely shared hospital wide lessons learnt. Number of incidents on the ward were low. 

Effective

Good

Updated 30 May 2018

We did not rate effective at this inspection.

On this inspection, we found that:

  • Staff had good administration support for monitoring adherence to the Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act. Staff were trained and showed good knowledge of the Mental Health and Mental Capacity Act. 

  • Staff showed good knowledge about individual patients during handovers. There were good working relationships and comprehensive handovers between nursing staff and therapy staff. 
  • Staff were up-to-date with supervision and appraisal. 

However:

  • Not all staff were specially trained or showed good knowledge of outlying factors and identifying risks in treatment and detoxification for substance misuse. Less than half of the ward staff had been trained in this area at the time of inspection.

Caring

Outstanding

Updated 30 May 2018

We did not rate caring at this inspection.

On this inspection, we found that:

  • We observed staff being kind and caring to patients. Staff treated them with dignity. 
  • All patients we spoke with gave good feedback about how staff treated them. All patients we spoke with told us they found the therapy programme to be good and helpful. 
  • Patients were involved in decisions about their care and had the opportunity to contribute and feedback about the programme. 

Responsive

Good

Updated 30 May 2018

We did not rate responsive at this inspection.

On this inspection, we found that:

  • ​Patients had good access to food, drink and outside space. There were a wide range of rooms available on the ward to support care and treatment. 
  • Patients we spoke with told us the process of admission had been efficient and timely.
  • Patients we spoke with knew how to make a complaint if needed. 

However:

  • There was no documented admittance criteria and no standard operating procedure available at the time of inspection.

  • Patients told us the food was of varying quality. Some patients told us the food presentation could be poor and choice limited.

Well-led

Good

Updated 30 May 2018

We did not rate well-led at this inspection.

On this inspection, we found that:

  • Staff morale was good and all staff we spoke with demonstrated compassionate and caring behaviours.
  • Staff knew who their senior managers were and told us they could raise concerns if needed. They regular opportunities to feedback about the service. Staff had developed the therapy programme based on feedback from patients. 

However: 

  • Changes in leadership at the hospital lead to delays in ensuring staff were trained adequately in substance misuse and detoxification awareness. 

Checks on specific services

Child and adolescent mental health wards

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

Long stay or rehabilitation mental health wards for working age adults

Updated 30 May 2018

Acute wards for adults of working age and psychiatric intensive care units

Updated 16 April 2018

Specialist eating disorder services

Updated 12 September 2017