You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 April 2019

Babyvision Limited is operated by Babyvision Limited. Facilities include one scanning room, one consultation room and one reception area.

The service comes under the diagnostic imaging core service they undertake baby keepsake scans, transvaginal scans and non-invasive pre-natal test (NIPT) tests.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We inspected the regulated activity of diagnostic imaging. We undertook an unannounced inspection on 1 March 2019. To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Services we rate

We rated it as Good overall.

We found good practice:

  • The service provided mandatory training in key skills to all staff and made sure everyone completed it.

  • Staff understood how to protect women from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it.

  • The service mostly controlled infection risk well. Staff mostly kept themselves clean. Staff kept equipment and the premises clean. They used control measures to prevent the spread of infection.

  • The service had suitable premises and equipment and looked after them well.

  • Staff completed and updated risk assessments for each woman. They kept clear records and asked for support when necessary. Records were clear, up-to-date and easily available to all staff providing care. Staff had paper and electronic records

  • The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.

  • The service would manage safety incidents well. Staff would recognise incidents and would reported them appropriately. Managers would investigate incidents and would share lessons learned with the whole team and the wider service.

  • Managers monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment and used the findings to improve them.

  • Staff understood how and when to assess whether a women had the capacity to make decisions about their care.

  • Staff cared for women with compassion. Feedback from women confirmed that staff treated them well and with kindness. Staff provided emotional support to women to minimise their distress. Staff involved women and those close to them in decisions about their care and treatment.

  • The service planned and provided services in a way that met the needs of local people. People could access the service when they wanted it.

  • The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the results, and shared these with all staff.

  • The registered manager had the right skills and abilities to run a service providing high-quality sustainable care. The registered manager promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on shared values.

  • The service systematically improved service quality and safeguarded high standards of care by creating an environment for good care to flourish.

  • The service had effective systems to identify potential problems, deal with those problems and could cope with both the expected and unexpected.

  • The service was committed to improving services by learning from when things went well or wrong and promoting training.

We found areas of practice that require improvement:

  • The registered manager was not always bare below the elbows whilst carrying out scans.

  • The service did not have an equality and diversity policy in place.

  • The registered manager had not received an appraisal.

  • Staff at the service did not have up to date Mental Capacity Act training.

  • Individual needs were not always met. Staff at the service had used family members to translate for women receiving scans which is not in line with best practice.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make some improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.

Amanda Stanford

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (Central)

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 April 2019

We rated it as Good because:

  • The service provided mandatory training in key skills to all staff and made sure everyone completed it.

  • Staff understood how to protect women from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse and they knew how to apply it.

  • The service mostly controlled infection risk well. Staff mostly kept themselves clean. Staff kept equipment and the premises clean.

  • The service had suitable premises and equipment and looked after them well.

  • Staff completed and updated risk assessments for each woman. They kept clear records and asked for support when necessary.

  • The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.

  • Staff kept records of women’s personal details. Records were clear, up-to-date and easily available to all staff providing care. Staff had paper and electronic records.

  • The service would manage safety incidents well. Staff would recognise incidents and would report them appropriately. Managers would investigate incidents and would share lessons learned with the whole team and the wider service. When things went wrong, staff would apologise and give women honest information and suitable support.

However, we also found the following areas of practice that require improvement:

  • The registered manager was not always bare below the elbows whilst carrying out scans.

Effective

Updated 29 April 2019

Caring

Good

Updated 29 April 2019

We rated it as Good because:

  • Staff cared for patients with compassion. Feedback from patients confirmed that staff treated them well and with kindness.

  • Staff provided emotional support to patients to minimise their distress.

  • Staff involved patients and those close to them in decisions about their care and treatment.

Responsive

Good

Updated 29 April 2019

We rated it as Good because:

  • The service planned and provided services in a way that met the needs of local people.

  • People could access the service when they wanted it.

  • The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and learned lessons from the results, and shared these with all staff.

However, we also found the following areas of practice that require improvement:

  • Individual needs were not always met. Staff at the service had used family members to translate for women receiving scans which is not in line with best practice.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 April 2019

We rated it as Good because:

  • The registered manager had the right skills and abilities to run a service providing high-quality sustainable care.

  • The registered manager promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on shared values.

  • The service systematically improved service quality and safeguarded high standards of care by creating an environment for good care to flourish.

  • The service had effective systems to identify potential problems, deal with those problems and could cope with both the expected and unexpected.

  • The service collected and managed information well to support all its activities, using secure systems with security safeguards.

  • The service engaged well with women, staff and the public to plan and manage appropriate services, and collaborated with partner organisations effectively.

  • The service was committed to improving services by learning from when things went well or wrong and promoting training.

Checks on specific services

Diagnostic imaging

Good

Updated 29 April 2019

The provision of ultrasound scanning services, which is classified under the diagnostic core service, was the only core service provided at Babyvision Limited.

We rated the service as good overall because there were processes in place for the escalation of unexpected findings during ultrasound scans. Feedback from women and their families was extremely positive. Women could access services and appointments in a way and at a time that suited them, women had timely access to treatment, and the registered manager of the service had the appropriate skills and experience to manage the business.

However, at the time of our inspection, the sonographer did not always follow best infection control practice. There was no equality and diversity policy, the registered manager had not received an appraisal, staff had no mental capacity training. Staff sometimes used relatives to translate for women.