• Ambulance service

Archived: Medical Services Ltd (Luton)

Unit 12, Bilton Court, Bilton Way, Luton, Bedfordshire, LU1 1UU (01582) 406708

Provided and run by:
Community Ambulance Service Ltd

All Inspections

16 January 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Medical Services Ltd (Luton) is operated by Medical Services Ltd. This independent ambulance service provides emergency and urgent care and a patient transport service.

We carried out this unannounced inspection on 16 January 2017 because we had received information of concern about the service. We did not inspect all elements of each key question, as this was a focused inspection.

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?

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The main service provided was patient transport services. Where our findings on Medical Services Ltd (Luton) – for example, management arrangements – also apply to other services, we do not repeat the information but cross-refer to the core service.

Services we do not rate

We regulate independent ambulance services but we do not currently have a legal duty to rate them. We highlight good practice and issues that service providers need to improve and take regulatory action as necessary.

We found the following areas of good practice:

  • Effective standards of cleanliness and hygiene were maintained within the service.

  • Generally, there were appropriate systems in place regarding the safe handling of medicines.

  • All staff we spoke with understood their responsibilities to raise, record and report safeguarding concerns.

  • The service had sufficient staff, of an appropriate skill mix, to enable the effective delivery of safe care and treatment on the days of our inspection.

  • Appropriate arrangements were in place for the recruitment of staff and the service had a suitable policy in place.

  • There was a formal process in place for gathering information and recording details relating to a patient’s medical condition when bookings were made.

However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

  • Staff understood their responsibilities to report incidents although they were not always given feedback so learning could be embedded in the service.

  • Duty of candour processes had not always been followed.

  • Generally, the service had systems in place to ensure the safety and maintenance of equipment; however, these were not always followed.

  • At the time of our inspection, there was no registered manager (RM) in place for the service. There had not been an RM in place since July 2015.

  • Effective systems were not in place to assess, monitor and improve the safety and quality of the care and treatment provided.

  • There was a lack of effective processes to ensure learning from all incidents was disseminated throughout the service and to all staff.

  • There was not an effective system in place to respond to complaints about the service.

  • There was not a full understanding of all the risks in the service underpinned by effective systems to assess, mitigate, and monitor ensuing actions to reduce the risk of avoidable harm for patients.

  • Risks found on inspection had not been recognised by the service.

  • Storage facilities for controlled drugs did not meet safety standards.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations. We also issued the provider with two requirement notices that affected the patient transport service. Details are at the end of the report.

Edward Baker

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (Central Region)

28 November 2013

During a routine inspection

Given the nature of this service we were not able to talk with people who had received treatment and support from Medical Services Limited (Luton). However, we did speak to two stakeholders who commissioned their service and we received positive comments. One stakeholder said, 'I am happy with the service they provide. Within the constraints of the contract they are as helpful as can be.' Another said, 'Medical Care Services Ltd provide an excellent service. They are very flexible and accommodating.'

We found that Medical Care Services Limited was compliant in all the outcomes we assessed. Evidence showed that the provider had effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

We found that the service was operated from well-maintained and secure premises. Vehicles used to transport people were properly maintained and suitable for its purpose.

People were treated by well trained and supported staff, who had the equipment they needed to do their job.

5 December 2012

During a routine inspection

When we visited Medical Services Ltd (Luton) on 5 December 2012, we saw a patient transport system providing a safe and supportive service to people needing transport to and between National Health Service hospitals in the Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and nearby regions. The location had a total of 84 vehicles, comprising eight high dependency units (HDUs), 12 stretcher vehicles, 22 wheelchair accessible transport vehicles, 39 seated only transport vehicles and 3 staff cars. Vehicles were sent from the location to be ready to deliver a service to Bedford Hospital, The Lister Hospital, Luton and Dunstable Hospital, Watford Hospital and various clinics in the area.

We were not able to speak to people using the service, as it does not support a regular core of individuals. However, we reviewed patient satisfaction surveys and saw these were good, were conducted regularly and considered in providing the continuing service to people.

We saw that the provider had good processes in place to ensure people received safe care and support. These included patient record forms for the HDU vehicles and for any other patient whose condition changed during the journey. We also saw effective cleaning and infection control processes and monitoring at the location.