You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 December 2013
Date of Publication: 8 January 2014
Inspection Report published 08 January 2014 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 10 December 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

We talked with four patients during our inspection visit. Patients told us they were happy with their care at the hospital, liked all the staff who looked after them and thought the hospital was kept clean. Patient’s confirmed that staff had talked through their procedure with them and had kept them up date with aspects of their care following surgery. Some comments captured included “[The doctor] explained the procedure, risks and benefits”, “Received good care. Nurses are nice and looked after me…enough staff”, “Excellent care, excellent staff …can’t do enough for you”, “The surgeon was very good …very attentive” and “Nurses are really good, quick to respond to the call bell.”

We reviewed patient feedback recently recorded via patient questionnaire surveys which were positive in nature. For example, relating to nursing one comment stated “It was great, I did not know what to expect as first time and it was brilliant.” In relation to the physiotherapy department some comments recorded stated “Excellent treatment and results” and “No improvement needed …excellent service.” We reviewed a sample of recently received individual feedback letters which had been received by members of the hospital’s senior management team. These letters contained a range of positive comments which demonstrated the positive aspects of care received by patients. For example, one letter stated “All of the staff I came into contact with were courteous, professional and most importantly retained their sense of humour.”

During our inspection we found the hospital employed a range of healthcare professionals to ensure patient’s care needs were met during their admission or visit to the hospital. These included medical officers, registered nurses, healthcare assistants and other members of the multi-disciplinary team including physiotherapists and imaging staff. Hospital consultants (surgeons, anaesthetists and physicians) were contracted to work sessions at the hospital via practising privileges arrangements. Since our last Inspection we found the hospital’s senior management team had introduced a range of ‘live’ quality monitoring processes which involved all departments and services within the hospital. This meant the clinical quality and safety of various aspects of the service and clinical care had been closely monitored, maintained and developed.

We reviewed a sample of seven sets of care records on the Mappin and Fulwood wards. These records included medical and nursing admission and assessment documents, care plans and other documents related to the care of the patient. We found care records, observation charts and risk assessment forms were completed to a reasonable standard. We found consent forms had been signed and dated by the patient and surgeon and the benefits and risks of treatment had been recorded. We found these care records reflected the needs of patients who had been admitted to the hospital.