Ultrasound-Care Bromsgrove

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

Effective

Responsive

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained good.

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

The service provided person-centred care and were flexible to ensure patients could attend when they wanted and with whomever they wanted. Staff provided a flexible service. Patients told us they offered additional appointments if scans were not of the expected quality. Chaperones were available for each appointment, and staff were trained in communication promoting a positive experience.

Due to the type of service, there were limited opportunities for the service to work with the wider healthcare economy. However, they were looking at developing additional pathways. The service received few complaints, but those received were taken seriously and resolutions agreed.

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 provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and supported them to make decisions about treatments or services available.

Managers made sure staff and patients could get help from interpreters or signers when needed. Details of support was discussed at the referral stage which enabled staff to be prepared for the appointment in advance.

The centre was accessible by wheelchair and step-free access was provided. The reception area and the waiting area had a seating area and toilet facilities for patients and visitors.

The service did not have a separate area for children and young people. However, if young people were accompanying patients, they were advised to bring someone to look after them whilst the appointment was in progress, and to bring items to keep them occupied.

We reviewed 24 patient records to assess how staff gave choice and involved individuals in decisions. Most appointments were made at the request of the patient, either to confirm pregnancy, stage of pregnancy, or for reassurance. Women chose the appointments in addition to those provided throughout their pregnancy by their NHS provider. Patients attending for non-pregnancy related scans were seen within the clinic to avoid waiting for appointments within NHS services.

Patients were informed of the cost of scans prior to attending their appointments. They were provided with a statement detailing the terms and conditions the cost and method of payment. Where possible this was always provided in writing prior to the commencement of the service. Treatment costs were clearly displayed on the provider website.

Patients were informed of the cost of scans prior to attending their appointments. They were provided with a statement detailing the terms and conditions the cost and method of payment. Where possible this was always provided in writing prior to the commencement of the service. Treatment costs were clearly displayed on the provider website.

The provider understood the diverse needs of people and their local communities and offered a variety of scans and treatments. The service provided a variety of ultrasound scans and had recently started to offer phlebotomy services. Scans offered were in line with the needs of the local population group, and included pregnancy related scans (gender, age), and non-pregnancy related scans. However, scans were largely completed at the patient request with minimal integration with other services or providers.

The provider worked with a few other services who referred for scans or phlebotomy tests. Most of the work completed were individually requested pregnancy scans, which meant there were limited interactions with the wider healthcare system.

Usually, all referrals were responded to on the same day and appointments scheduled within one week of referral. This meant that anyone needed urgent appointments could be accommodated, helping to alleviate concerns or speed up treatments. We also heard that when scans were not possible due to the baby’s position, staff were accommodating at finding alternative dates and times.

The service had systems to help care for patients in need of additional support or specialist intervention. Chaperones were allocated to each shift, which enabled additional support. Senior managers ensured staff knew how to manage difficult conversations or break bad news, and policies clearly supported and promoted clear communication.

The service was open for appointments six days per week, with appointment slots across the day, from 8am to 9pm. This enabled patients to find an appointment time suitable to their needs. The service was closed on Tuesdays. Appointments could be identified across other locations if there was a need for an urgent same day review.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information, but formats were limited to online advice. Leaflets were available related to costings but didn’t necessarily outline treatment advice.

People were made aware of the costs of any diagnostic and screening procedures, and these were clearly displayed on the company website and in leaflets available within the centre. Women could choose an appointment to suit their needs, for example, 4D scanning, gender reveal merchandise and heartbeat recordings. The cost of each product was clearly displayed in the premises and online.

Appointment information was confirmed verbally and by email. Invoicing was also completed online, enabling information to be shared quickly and prior to appointments.

Sonography reports were stored securely onsite, as well as electronically. This enabled images and information to be reviewed retrospectively for quality reviews or in the event of a complaint.

Women were able to buy additional photographs or images at the time of their appointment, and the centre displayed samples of the images available to ensure women knew what to expect. Sonographers clearly explained that images were not always clear, due to positioning, age, or the woman’s Body Mass Index.

The service and staff made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment, and support. The service had implemented a QR code feedback form, and patients were encouraged to use this before they left.

Senior managers encouraged patient feedback about their experiences using a QR code Feedback could also be given through their website. Senior managers tracked and responded to feedback and offered apologies if necessary. The service received no formal complaints during the year preceding the inspection.

Informal complaints or concerns were investigated, and patients received a response within days of their concerns being raised. C We saw three informal complaints between January 2026 and January 2026. Two related to the quality of the image produced and the third referred to the lack of image due to the scan being completed too early in the pregnancy. All informal complaints were responded to and a resolution found.

Complaints were discussed at team meetings, and we saw how staff were encouraged to discuss image quality and limiting factors at the time of appointment to prevent complaints from occurring.

.

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

The service completed around 120 scans per week (6240 in the last twelve-month period). There were minimal cancellations and where possible appointments were rearranged if women were unable to attend when originally planned.

People could access the service when they needed to and received the right care promptly. On referral, patients were allocated an appointment slot to suit their needs and in line with the sonographer availability and skill set. Appointments were usually planned within one week of referral.

Managers worked to keep the number of cancellations to a minimum. Sonographers were able to cover any gaps in the service, so cancellations by the provider did not occur. Due to the proximity of a sister centre, the service was able to offer appointments at an alternative location in the event of a last-minute disruption to service.

Patients we spoke with during the assessment did not raise any concerns about the length of time they were kept waiting for their appointment.

The service provided appointments to anyone referred, unless there was a clinical reason not to complete the test requested. The service provided was limited to one aspect of care (scanning or phlebotomy) and the appropriate pathway was followed. This meant that there was equity for all patients. Outcomes were not measured.

The service monitored patient access. This information was used to inform service planning and delivery, such as the scans available and opening hours. Senior managers knew the number of scans completed, and there were no outcomes to be reported.

People who did not speak English as their first language could access the service. Staff had access to interpreter services by telephone. Assistance was discussed at the point of referral to ensure everything was in place for the appointment.

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.