Lambda Medical Ltd

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Staff told us they listened to peoples wishes and considered individual needs. They would place patients at the forefront of their care. Staff told us they would spend time speaking with patients to understand health issues and empower independent decision making. For example, individuals were supported to use their own equipment such as personal wheelchairs to enable comfortable seating during journeys. Feedback from observations of partner organisations evidenced staff were able to develop excellent rapport with members of the public ensuring people were at the centre of care provision.

Staff actively asked about advanced directives and advanced care plans that were in place. This included understanding decisions around DNACPR.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff took time to understand the needs of people before embarking on complex transfers. They took time to liaise with and ensure there was hospital bed availability at receiving hospitals for planned transfers. Where care was not always joined up between services this was reviewed internally and consideration given to how improvements could be made for future journeys.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff could use communication aids for non-verbal, speech impaired or neuro-diverse patients. Staff had access to picture cards to support communication with children or people who were speech-impaired.

Patient information leaflets were available on the vehicles that provided details on how to give feedback.

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

We reviewed complaints and saw there were none for the previous 12 months.

Staff told us that people knew how to give feedback and raise concerns about their care. We saw there were QR codes and printed forms in each vehicle, which people could use should they wish to give feedback. The service made it easy for people to share feedback.

Learning from complaints and concerns was seen as an opportunity for improvement. We saw actions were identified following review of complaints.

There was a Complaints Policy in place. A complaints log was maintained, and individual members of the leadership team were allocated to review complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff made reasonable adjustments including communication and mobility support for patients when this was identified. There was a Reasonable Adjustment Policy in place supporting planning for reasonable adjustments. For example, ear defenders or low stimulation would be considered for people with sensory needs.

Information was taken at the point of booking a transfer. Adjustments were identified and made at this stage. People could also make requests for reasonable adjustment via a request form completed at the time of booking.

Staff had access to interpretation support to ensure people whose first language was not spoken English could access support. Pictorial information and communication cards were available for staff to communicate with people who had additional needs.

Bariatric and paediatric equipment was available.

The ‘Reasonable Adjustments for additional needs’ document stated use of reasonable adjustments should be recorded and monitored to ensure compliance with best practice. The service did not audit data to evidence reasonable adjustments had been made. Without clear oversight there was a risk that reasonable adjustments were not always made.

People were supported to provide feedback and raise concerns if their needs were not met.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the people using the service felt empowered to give their views. For example, staff told us they were aware of the need to be able to present information in different ways.

People whose first language was not spoken English could access the service. Staff had access to interpretation services. There was pictorial information available to assist staff in engaging with people who had additional needs.

Staff were trained in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.