You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 17 January 2013
Date of Publication: 13 February 2013
Inspection Report published 13 February 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 17 January 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and received feedback from people using comment cards.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

People who use the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care and treatment. A website was available, which gave information about the service, the tests provided and their costs.

People who contacted the service for a first appointment, were telephoned by the clinical cardiac physiologist prior to their appointment. This was to ensure that they understood the service and tests available to them. It also ensured that people were clear about whether their medical insurance covered them, or if not, that they were clear about the costs of the service.

People who used the service who were not able to speak English, brought with them a family member who spoke English, or they arranged for an interpreter to attend. The staff provided a translation service for Gujarati, Hindi, Urdu and Swahili. This support was to ensure people were fully informed and understood the risks and benefits regarding their care and treatment.

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected. All consultations took place in separate rooms. The rooms had obscured glass at the windows as well as blinds. Curtains were drawn around a couch if an examination was undertaken. We observed that staff were respectful towards people.