Psychiatry-UK

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

The service was easy to access. Its referral criteria did not exclude patients who would have benefitted from care. Staff routinely followed up patients who missed appointments by sending them reminders via text messages and through the patient portal.

The service had clear criteria to describe which patients they would offer services to and offered patients a place on waiting lists. The service had an eligibility policy to support decision making about assessing suitable patients and signposting people they could not offer a service.

Staff tried to contact people who did not attend appointments and offered support. Patients had some flexibility and choice in the appointment times available which started in early morning and ended in late evening. Appointments were also available over weekends which patients reportedly found helpful to fit in with their work and home life.

This service scored 64 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff provided a range of care and treatment suitable for the patients in the service. Patients told us they felt comfortable to share information with their clinicians and they had confidence in the treatment options they were provided with.

Staff from different disciplines worked together as a team to benefit patients. The teams had effective working relationships with other relevant teams within the organisation and with relevant services outside the organisation.

The service used systems to help them monitor waiting lists and support patients. Staff supported patients when they were referred, transferred between services, or needed physical health care.

Patients told us there was a lot of useful information on the service website that their clinicians had directed them to. Patients felt the patient portal was beneficial to keep in touch with their clinician and report side effects of their medication. However, some patients told us that they struggled to use the patient portal and had difficulty making contact with the service. For example, patients sometimes waited over an hour when trying to make a call into the service.

The provider had an 'acceptable use of information policy and provided information governance training to all staff. There was an information governance steering group who oversaw all incidents relating to confidential personal information. The provider met and exceeded the standards for the 'Data Security and Protection Toolkit' (DSPT) - a comprehensive framework established by the National Health Service (NHS) to safeguard patient information.

The information governance steering group published newsletters and staff followed the provider's confidentiality policy. There was a privacy statement on the provider's website. Staff sought consent for patient sessions to be recorded and patients could make subject access requests to the provider.

Staff made sure patients could access information on treatment, local service, their rights and how to complain.

Patients told us they felt involved in decisions about their care. Patients reported they were kept up to date by the service for individual concerns via the patient portal and wider issues that affect all patients were notified via the website.

Patients were encouraged to share feedback on their symptoms and experiences whilst titrating on medications.

The service welcomed patient and carers feedback. The provider had established a patient voice group to help the service test different elements of the patient portal and to learn about the patient’s experience. Patients were asked to give feedback on user experience of patient portal.

The service offered early morning, late evening and even weekend virtual appointments. Most patients we spoke with found this to be very helpful, flexible and accommodating to their daily routines however, some patients felt early morning appointments were not appropriate.

The service could support and make adjustments for people with disabilities, communication needs or other neurodiverse specific needs.

Staff told us they were always looking at ways to improve patient outcomes, experience and safety. For example, staff reported that the AI technology reduced clinical administrative time which led to greater capacity to support patients and also the AI system had helped reduce waiting times.

Due to new processes, the service had reduced waiting times for both the ADHD and ASD assessment pathways and projected figures demonstrated further reduction in waiting times were expected through 2025.

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.