- Independent mental health service
Battersea Bridge House
Report from 4 August 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings - Acute wards for adults of working age and psychiatric intensive care units
Our view of the service
Date of inspection: 11-12 June 2015
Battersea Bridge House is a 22-bed mental health hospital for adults of working age located in London Borough of Wandsworth. It is run by In-Mind Healthcare Group. It has a 10 bed Female Treatment Ward providing structured treatment for female patients requiring intensive care and support. A 6 bed Female Admission Ward, providing urgent admission for assessment and short-term treatment and a 6 bed Male Ward, providing acute inpatient care. The hospital provides care to both informal patients and those detained under the Mental Health Act.
We undertook this comprehensive inspection due to the aged rating and time that had lapsed since the previous inspection. We carried out a site visit to all three wards (Browning Ward, Blake Ward and Hardy Ward) on 11 and 12 June 2025. This was our first inspection of Battersea Bridge House Acute services, since it had changed its Assessment Service Group. We previously inspected Battersea Bridge Forensic Inpatient Secure Ward in October 2022.
The Forensic Inpatient Secure Ward services were previously rated as requires improvement overall. Following this inspection the rating has changed to good. We inspected all quality statements across safe, effective, caring, and well-led key questions and have combined the scores to achieve the key question ratings.
During this inspection we found 6 breaches of the regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. We identified a number of issues around medicines management. The provider did not always administer medicines safely. Staff did not always follow treatment in line with patient's care plans and records sometimes lacked detail. Staff did not consistently complete incident forms with all required information. For example, when a physical intervention was carried out, staff did not always detail the position of staff and length hold. Furthermore, whilst staff could describe how to manage risk appropriately, this was not evidenced in records. We did not find evidence of staff effectively completing risk management plans for patients.
We found several areas of good practice. There were enough staff to ensure patients' safety and meet their needs. Patients were supported to have choice and control and could give feedback on their care. Staff developed and updated personalised care plans. Staff and leaders reported a supportive and open team culture.
People's experience of this service
We spoke to 3 patients and 2 carers of patients across the wards. Patients we spoke with were generally happy with the care received from staff. One patient said the ward conditions were not great and could be cleaned more regularly.
Feedback from carers was mixed. One carer said communication with staff varied and some found it challenging to get information. However, most carers said that staff had the skills required to meet the needs of their relative.
Some patients and carers we spoke with described staff as kind and respectful, and most carers said their relative reported feeling safe on the ward.
Most carers said they knew the process to raise concerns or complaints. Patients were able to provide regular feedback about their care and the ward environment, and we saw evidence of changes being made in response to this.
Patients could access general advocacy, and staff informed them of their rights under the Mental Health Act (MHA).
Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act Compliance
Mental Health Act
At the time of our inspection, the hospital provided care to both informal patients and those detained under the Mental Health Act (MHA).
92.45% of staff across all 3 wards had completed mandatory training in Mental Health Act Awareness. This training was also part of induction for all new clinical staff.
Staff had easy access to administrative support and legal advice on implementation of the MHA and its Code of Practice. Staff reviewed the section expiry dates for patients detained under the MHA regularly.
The provider had relevant policies and procedures that reflected the most recent guidance. Staff had access to local MHA policies and procedures and to the Code of Practice.
Staff explained to patients their rights under the MHA in a way that they could understand, repeated it as required and recorded that they had done so.
Staff ensured that patients were able to take Section 17 leave (permission for patients to leave hospital) when this had been granted.
Staff carried out monthly audits to ensure that the Mental Health Act was being applied correctly.
Staff requested review from a second opinion appointed doctor when necessary.
Mental Capacity Act
98.31% of staff across the 3 wards had completed mandatory training in the Mental Capacity Act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Staff assessed and recorded capacity to consent appropriately. They did this on a decision-specific basis with regard to significant decisions.
We saw evidence that staff documented patients’ capacity to consent to treatment and information sharing.