The Baby Skan Studio

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that safety was a priority for everyone, and leaders embedded a culture of openness and collaboration. We checked that people were safe and protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm, neglect, abuse and discrimination. We also checked people’s liberty was protected where this was in their best interests and in line with legislation.

At our last inspection we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has improved to good which meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 69 (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 did not always have a proactive culture of safety. Staff did not always investigate and report safety events. There was no formal incident reporting system or process of shared learning. The service did not maintain an incident log. We were told there had been no incidents in the past 12 months, however there was 1 incident of a person fainting in the toilet facilities following a consultation. Whilst the registered manager talked through the appropriate actions they took following this incident, this wasn’t documented and looked at to see if there were any lessons that could have been learnt. The registered manager agreed this type of incident would be recorded in the future. Staff were aware of their obligation under duty of candour. Duty of candour is a general duty to be open and transparent with people receiving care from your service.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care. The service offered baby scanning and private men and women’s health check ultrasound scans. People self-referred to the service or were referred from an independent private hospital.

The service ensured there were safe processes to refer people to healthcare partners if required. At our last inspection we found the provider was not ensuring all referrals to healthcare agencies were recorded with the reason for referral the person accepting the referral. At this assessment improvements had been made to refer people from The Babyskan Studio to the local trust so there was now timely access to further treatment. The service worked with the local trust to arrange a follow up appointment within 48 hours and sent the ultrasound scans to the trust electronically. The referral was recorded along with the reason for referral. The service then contacted the person with the details of their appointment with the trust. This ensured there was timely follow up for the person and the onus wasn’t on them to make the arrangements at what may be a difficult time.

There were safe processes to refer people to healthcare partners for private men and women’s health check ultrasound scans. Where the person was referred by an independent private hospital, the scan information was sent directly to the independent hospital. There were also direct referrals for people to the local NHS trust for urology and oncology should an issue be found on the ultrasound scan. For other issues identified during a person’s scan, they were given the relevant scan information, including the scan and informed to book a GP Appointment. We were told this was because the GPs would not accept a direct referral from the service, this was a system wide issue.

The service worked well with a local private independent hospital who provided positive feedback on how the service was able to scan people that were referred to it in a timely way.

Staff knew how to recognise, protect and report people who may have been suffering from abuse. At the last inspection staff were not trained to the correct level of safeguarding, however improvements had been made and at this inspection staff had the appropriate level of safeguarding training. The safeguarding lead was trained to level 3. All staff had been trained to level 2 for both adults and children and all training was current.

There were clear processes to follow to report safeguarding. There was a safeguarding policy and numbers to contact the local authority if there were any concerns. There had been no safeguarding referrals made by the service in the past 12 months.

People booked electronically and were required to bring their maternity notes to the scan. This meant staff were aware of the contact numbers for the named community midwife and people’s GP details. This was just in case any concerns were identified, and they would be able to be share with the relevant healthcare professionals with the consent of the person.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

The service supported people who often had an emotional reaction to the information the sonographer provided. We were told the service always allowed people the time they needed to collect themselves. People were offered an alternative exit route if they did not want to exit through the reception room where there were other people waiting. Reviews of the service stated how people did not feel rushed and they were given plenty of time.

The service allowed up to 4 people into the consulting room for ultrasound scans. Feedback from people stated, “everything was explained as it was being done. Staff were all very polite and friendly. We felt comfortable with our children being able to see everything too”.

Staff knew to contact the emergency services in the case of an emergency.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. Staff made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The service had suitable facilities to meet the needs of people and those close to them. There were seating areas for people to wait and a separate consulting room. People had access to a serviced water machine whilst they waited.

Equipment was managed safely. Maintenance of scanning equipment was carried out on an annual basis or when required. The service completed regular electrical safety testing of portable appliances, which was within date.

The environment was maintained safely. The service had an insurance policy to help in the event of business emergencies. The fire exits were clear and unobstructed at the time of the inspection.

Staff and people’s safety was protected as people were always offered a trained chaperone to attend the scan appointment.

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. However, there were gaps in management and support arrangements for staff because staff did not receive annual appraisals.

There were 2 people working for the service and 1 person who worked on a self-employed basis. We received feedback from staff stating there were good working relationships in the team but there were no regular supervision or appraisals. Annual appraisals offer a structured process where managers and employees can meet to discuss job performance, set goals and plan for future development.

The service monitored staff training to ensure it had been completed and was in date. All 3 staff who worked for the service had a current Disclosure and Barring Service check.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. Staff detected and controlled the risk of it spreading.

Personal protective equipment was readily available. Gloves were available for use in the consultation room and staff had access to masks. Hand gel was available within the scan room and within the waiting room. Cleaning products were safely stored in the kitchen room which had a keypad lock on the door and was closed during consultations. Equipment such as chairs and the couch were not fabric and were able to be wiped clean.

The environment was observed to be visibly clean. The registered person undertook the cleaning of the premises and stated this was carried out between clients and at the start and end of each day the clinic was open. However, there was no cleaning log so we could not be assured this was regularly taking place despite the premises being visibly clean. A log provides assurance cleaning has taken place historically.

Waste was well managed. The service had a contract with a clinical waste company.

The service did not hold any medicines.