We carried out a review of the data available to us about Portsmouth PET/CT Centre on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Portsmouth PET/CT Centre, you can give feedback on this service.
Portsmouth PET/ CT Centre is operated by Alliance Medical Limited. Portsmouth PET/CT Centre provides scan imaging at Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Cosham, Portsmouth, Hampshire.
NHS England commissions the service to carry out 2500 scans per year and is supported by the local NHS trust.
The service provides a diagnostic imaging service for patients who require a PET/CT scan. A PET/CT scan is a combination of a PET (positron emission tomography) scan and a CT (computerised tomography) scan. The PET scan shows how active cells are in different parts of the body using a radioactive injection. The CT scan takes a series of images to build this information into 3D pictures of the inside of body. Local governance was monitored through regular meetings with the Administration of Radioactive Substances Advisory Committee (ARSAC) holder (a specialist licensed radiologist) in the NHS trust. The service was also supported by the NHS trust medical physics team who provided a Radiation Protection Advisor, a Medical Physics Expert and Radioactive Waste Advisor.
We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the inspection on 19 September 2019.
To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.
Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
Services we rate
We rated it as Good overall.
The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
Staff provided good care and treatment, offered patient’s a drink and biscuits following their scan, and gave pain relief advice when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and answered any questions patients had. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it.
Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.
However,
Delays and rescheduling of patient scans sometimes occurred because the radioactive medicine was not able to be used for the scan. This was due to a failure to meet the strict quality controls during manufacture or delays in the quality assurance process of the radioactive medicine, which led to a delay in the release of the medicine to the service.
The service did not document all identified risks and plans to manage the risks.
Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.