Practice Plus Group Hospital - Emersons Green

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

This means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good.

We have not awarded this service a score for Effective.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Effective.

Quality Statement Score: 3

Description: We maximise the effectiveness of people’s care and treatment by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs with them.

People's needs were assessed before treatment to ensure care and treatment could be planned and delivered safely. Assessments considered people's physical and mental health, communication, sensory and social needs, and informed pre-admission planning.

Assessments were completed by staff with the appropriate skills, knowledge and competence.

We reviewed 6 patient records in the outpatient department. Records demonstrated people received comprehensive assessments prior to treatment. All records contained a National Early Warning Score (NEWS2) assessment, documented consent, and records of relevant investigations and physical observations.

Leaders told us people were contacted before their appointment to identify any individual needs and reasonable adjustments required to support safe and effective care. The hospital also provided a 24-hour telephone helpline, staffed by registered nurses, that enabled people to seek advice and raise concerns before attending their appointment.

We spoke with 6 people who used the service. They told us they had received a telephone call and follow-up email before their appointment. Communication included discussion of their current health needs and information about what to expect during their visit.

Staff held weekly multidisciplinary team meetings to review upcoming outpatient appointments. These meetings were used to identify clinical risks, discuss individual care needs and determine whether additional resources or support were required. Staff also held daily safety huddles to review the day's planned activity and ensure people's needs had been identified and appropriately planned for.

Quality Statement Score: 3

Description: We plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what is important and matters to them and in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

The department had good systems for ensuring they keep up to date and embedded this in their service. Staff and leaders spoken with understood the current legislation, national standards and evidence-based good practice guidance relevant to their service and applied these effectively.

Staff participated in clinical audit, benchmarking and quality improvement initiatives to support continuous learning and service development.

Staff had access to company policies, including best practice guidance and professional standards, to support safe and effective care. Staff had the necessary skills, knowledge and experience to meet the needs of patients using the service.

Managers provided new staff with a comprehensive induction programme, regular supervision and access to specialist training, including biometry core competency training and pre-operative assessment training.

There was a structured competency programme for outpatient department staff, which formed part of the induction process for new starters.

The service held bi-monthly governance meetings, daily huddles and weekly multidisciplinary team meetings to support communication, learning and oversight. Staff told us they had regular one-to-one meetings with their managers and described the leadership team as supportive, approachable and accessible.

Quality Statement Score: 3

Description: We work effectively across teams and services to support people, making sure they only need to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when they move between different services.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Plans for transition, referral and discharge were discussed through multidisciplinary processes and reflected people’s individual needs, circumstances, ongoing care arrangements and expected outcomes.

Staff told us that a weekly multidisciplinary planning meeting was held to review cases, identify potential risks and determine whether additional resources or support were required to meet people’s needs safely and effectively.

Relevant staff within the outpatient department had access to the information they needed to understand people’s needs and to assess, plan and deliver care and treatment appropriately.

We saw that pre-operative assessments were completed by staff and shared with the surgical department. This supported effective communication between teams and helped ensure continuity of care throughout the patient's treatment pathway.

Quality Statement Score: 3

Description: We support people to manage their health and wellbeing so they can maximise their independence, choice and control, live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice, and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduced their future needs for care and support.

People were supported to make informed decisions about their health and wellbeing. Information and guidance were provided to help people understand how lifestyle choices could affect their treatment, recovery and overall health outcomes.

We saw a range of patient information leaflets available in the outpatient department. These included information on alcohol consumption and surgery, smoking cessation and surgery, Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA), and blood transfusions.

People attending for pre-admission assessments were provided with information packs tailored to their planned procedure. These packs included information about the proposed surgery, potential risks and expected outcomes. They also contained guidance on venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention, different types of anaesthesia, associated risks and pain management. This helped ensure people had access to the information they needed to understand their treatment and make informed decisions about their care.

Quality Statement Score:3

Description: We routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it and to ensure that outcomes are positive and consistent, and that they meet both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The service demonstrated a structured approach to monitoring the effectiveness of care, treatment, and support. This was evidenced from discussions with people and staff, quality of the records reviewed, and the evidence submitted by the provider.

We reviewed 6 patient records and found that each contained a nationally recognised tool for assessing and monitoring patients at risk of deterioration.

The service sought feedback from people, their families, and carers through questionnaires and follow-up telephone assessments. This feedback was used to help evaluate the quality of care provided and identify opportunities for improvement.

Staff told us the service worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals and other stakeholders when reviewing individual outcomes. Regular meetings were held to discuss care, monitor progress, and ensure people received appropriate support throughout their treatment pathway.

Quality Statement Score:3

Description: We tell people about their rights around consent and respect these when we deliver person-centred care and treatment.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centered care and treatment.

Staff took appropriate steps to support people to make their own decisions about their care and treatment wherever possible.

All patient records we reviewed contained completed consent documentation. Consent forms clearly outlined the proposed procedure, together with the associated risks and benefits, demonstrating that people had been provided with the information they needed to make informed decisions about their care.

Staff told us that if a person lacked the mental capacity to make a specific decision, their care and treatment would be discussed with relevant representatives, advocates and members of the multidisciplinary team. The outcome of these discussions would be documented in the person's records.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. They told us that decisions made on behalf of people who lacked capacity would be made in their best interests and would take account of the person's wishes, feelings, beliefs, values, culture and personal history wherever these were known.