The Saturn Centre SARC

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We assessed 2 quality statements under the effective key question. Patients’ needs were systematically assessed and their care and treatment were delivered according to standards and evidence-based practice. Staff understood the importance of seeking informed consent and always carefully explained to patients what their rights around consent were.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

Patient records we reviewed were detailed, contemporaneous and clearly outlined the care and treatment given by staff.

Patients attending the SARC received a comprehensive assessment of their needs including their mental and physical health and post sexual assault health. Patients were fully assessed for risk factors such as domestic abuse and non-fatal strangulation so that any concerns could be identified, and support offered. Patients who attended the SARC frequently had specific care plans implemented to ensure a co-ordinated and consistent approach to their needs. Self-harm risk assessments were also completed for patients to identify support needs when they left the service. Additional assessments were undertaken for children and young people in relation to their social care history, household composition, education and ability to give consent.

Recognised screening tools were used to identify anyone who might be experiencing withdrawal symptoms from drugs or alcohol, and a small amount of alcohol was kept on site to address any acute withdrawal needs.

Where appropriate, patients were provided with emergency medical and sexual health treatments following national guidance, and sexually transmitted infection testing was available on site for children under the age of 14.

The SARC had clear referral pathways in place to support patients’ holistic needs and records showed that appropriate onward referrals to other agencies such as independent sexual violence advisors, GPs, counselling services and genitourinary medicine clinics had been made. All patient referrals were then actively followed up by staff to ensure they had been received.

All patients received a booklet following their attendance at the SARC outlining the care they had received, the medicines given and a list of referrals that had been made on their behalf. This booklet also contained helpful information about sources of support for both patients and their advocates.

A meeting was held every day to review each case that had been seen at the SARC and to ensure patients’ needs had been fully assessed, and the procedures had been followed correctly. In addition to this, regular peer reviews were undertaken, allowing for a more in-depth review of the case notes and treatment delivered to patients. Following a recent quality review of the service, managers were considering the use of external health colleagues to support the peer review process.

The judgement for Delivering evidence-based care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

We found staff understood the importance of seeking informed consent from patients. Patients’ capacity to give informed consent was actively assessed, with clear guidelines in place for staff about what to do if this was in doubt.

Signed consent for examination, treatment and the taking of and the storage of images was obtained for every patient. Staff repeatedly checked with patients throughout their forensic examination if they were happy to continue with it.

Parental responsibility was recorded on the records we viewed, and staff also considered Gillick competence when supporting children and young people. One sexual offences’ examiner told us they had respected the wishes of a young person who had been assessed as Gillick competent, over those of their parents. Staff reported that they never felt rushed in their work, allowing them plenty of time to explain procedures to patients and ensure they had their informed consent.

Staff also had access to demonstration swabs and speculums that could be used to help explain to patients what would be involved in their examination, and ensuring they understood.