The Baby Skan Studio

On this page

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

We looked for evidence that people and communities had the best possible outcomes because their needs were assessed. We checked that people’s care, support and treatment reflected these needs and any protected equality characteristics, ensuring people were at the centre of their care. We also looked for evidence that leaders instilled a culture of improvement, where understanding current outcomes and exploring best practice was part of their everyday work.

At our last assessment this key question was inspected but not rated. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The booking forms requested relevant information from people and also signposted safety information such as “if you are suffering from pelvic pain / or bleeding you must consult your midwife immediately”.

The service had a person-centred approach. People’s feedback stated “Loved every minute of our visit. The sonographer was amazing throughout and no question was too much”. We were told by staff the service often didn’t charge people for their scan if bad news was received.

The service had a wheelchair ramp which allowed all people access to the building.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment taking into account what was important and mattered to them. Staff did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Since the last inspection, the service had developed its clinical policies. The registered person stated they checked the British Medical Ultrasound society website regularly for updates on best practice and guidance. We were told updates in guidance were highlighted to the sonographer by the local trust in which they worked and they ensured these guidelines were followed at the service.

The sonographer was employed by the local NHS trust and their mandatory training and competency was measured by the local NHS trust. The registered person had copies of the sonographer’s training record. The sonographer’s training included how to deliver bad news, safeguarding adults and children and infection prevention control.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. Since the previous inspection the service had introduced an electronic system which allowed information to be shared securely with other services such as the local NHS trust.

The website was clear about what ultrasound packages could be purchased. The booking form for the service was clear the client would receive a formal written report for each ultrasound scan, which would be given to them to pass onto their GP.

The service provided information leaflets for people to manage their health and wellbeing. We saw health promotion leaflets available and accessible in the reception room of the premises. The sonographer stated the information leaflets provided at the clinic were the same as the leaflets provided at the early pregnancy unit at the local NHS trust. The service had miscarriage association information cards to give to people so they were able to access support and help if it was required. People were given leaflets in the goody bag which they took home.

The service monitored people’s scans to ensure a quality ultrasound image was obtained either for referral to another health care professional or for keepsake and bonding purposes. Staff ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of peopl using the service.

The provider monitored the quality of the service by asking people and those with them if they were happy with their scan images. For baby scanning, staff told us if the baby presented in the wrong position, then the person was invited to come back to see if the baby’s position had adjusted so a good quality scan could be obtained.

The provider recorded the number and type of ultrasound scans undertaken each month.

Since the previous inspection the provider was offering transvaginal ultrasounds in addition to abdominal ultrasounds. The sonographer stated this helped to identify any issues in early pregnancy and resulted in a referral to the early pregnancy assessment clinic if necessary.

There was no formal process for the clinic to professional review the quality of the ultrasound images however the sonographer had their scans reviewed in the local NHS trust where they worked.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People completed a consent form electronically when booking their scan package. This system was an improvement since the previous inspection. The provider understood their responsibility to gain consent from people before sonographers completed an ultrasound scan. Staff recognised and respected a person’s choice when deciding upon their scan package. Staff adapted scan packages to meet the needs of people.