Archived: Hathaway Medical Centre, Surgical Suite

We undertook a follow up review for Hathaway Medical Centre, Surgical Suite in September 2013 and found that people were protected from the risk of acquiring an infection. This was because the provider had made changes to the infection control processes and the environment following the inspection in March 2013.

Staff were supported in their roles and with their responsibilities. This enabled staff to deliver care and treatment to a safe and appropriate standard. We noted that staff had received appropriate training relating to their roles and an appraisal in the last 12 months. They were also involved in team meetings.

The provider had suitable systems in place to effectively identify, assess and manage the risks to health, safety and welfare of people and staff. The registered manager showed us copies of audits, risk assessments and quality monitoring records which demonstrated how the provider was monitoring the risks to health, safety and welfare.

During the inspection in March 2013 a medication storage concern was also identified. At our inspection in September 2013 we followed this up and inspected the providers systems and processes for the management of medicines. We found that that the people were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines because the provider had appropriate systems in place.

We found that people had consented and been involved in decisions about their treatment. The treatment records showed effective, safe and appropriate personalised treatment and care to people. People told us they had received a good standard of care and treatment. They liked having the same doctor carrying out the operation that they saw at their initial consultation. One person said 'the care was very good. No problems at all.'

There were ineffective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. Staff and people who used the service were not adequately protected from the risk of infection because the provider did not have an effective system for monitoring the risk if infection in the centre. A number of infection control issues were observed at the inspection.

People and staff considered there were sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people. We were not assured that there were sufficient staff with the right competences, knowledge, experience, qualifications and skills to support people. One person said 'the staff were very good, the doctor was brilliant.'

There was some clinical monitoring of the service but we were not shown a formal systematic approach to quality assurance.