The Priory Hospital Dewsbury

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to dignity and respect. The service had made improvements and was no longer in breach of regulations. People were being treated with dignity and respect. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good planning and delivery of operations.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We saw examples of care plans that had been based on conversations that patients and staff took part in together, these included one to ones between patients and named nurses and in multi-disciplinary meetings. Following these conversations, we also saw individualised timetables for some patients and evidence that activities detailed on these timetables had been carried out.

Community meeting minutes demonstrated that patients were offered the opportunity to give feedback about all aspects of ward operations, such as food, activities and the environment, facilities and resources available to them. Where feedback was negative, appropriate actions were raised to try to resolve these issues.

When appropriate, staff ensured that patients had access to external opportunities to support their recovery, for example support to access accommodation and continuing treatment for those moving into the community.

Staff supported patients to maintain contact with their families and carers. Where this was appropriate, families and carers could visit people on the ward and there were rooms on the ward that were suitable for family and carer visits. If patients needed it, they were offered encouragement to phone families and carers so that they could keep in touch.

Staff supported patients to access their chosen place of worship within the community, where this was appropriate.

Staff made notifications to external bodies as needed. They responded promptly and positively when follow up information was required, and they worked alongside stakeholders to ensure a useful flow of information was maintained.

Information governance systems included confidentiality of patient records. The service complied with the Accessible Information Standard.

Staff ensured that patients could obtain information on treatments, local services, patients’ rights and how to complain to the provider and other regulatory bodies. The information provided was in a form accessible to the patient group.

Staff made information leaflets available in languages spoken by patients where they were required.

Staff ensured carers, families and commissioners were regularly updated about the patient’s progress. We saw examples of regular communications that were prepared for families and carers where patients had consented.

Patients knew how to complain or raise concerns. There were clear instructions around the ward for people to follow. When patients complained or raised concerns, they received feedback.

Staff knew how to protect patients who raised concerns or complaints from discrimination and harassment. Staff knew how to handle complaints appropriately.

Staff received feedback on the outcome of investigation of complaints and acted on the findings. For example, patients had complained about the quality of food and work was being undertaken to consider their complaint and make changes as a result of this feedback.

Staff ensured the needs of patients with mobility issues were met, they could place wheelchair users in bedrooms closer to other facilities on the ward and in rooms that had more space and the ability to install necessary equipment.

Staff made reasonable adjustments for patients, for example patients with mobility issues were provided with walking aids and shower chairs.

There was adequate medical cover day and night, a doctor could attend the ward quickly in an emergency and the hospital was within a reasonable travelling distance to the local acute hospital.

Staff ensured patients had access to post-discharge care, for example, S117 aftercare, community mental health services and crisis services. Staff planned for patients’ discharge, including good liaison with care managers and co-ordinators.

Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the people using the service felt empowered to give their views. They did this at regular community meetings and other forums that the provider hosted to gather feedback from people using services.

There were clear plans for discharge for those patients that were able to work towards that, these plans were being developed alongside patients and families and carers. It was possible to see the work that was being done by the staff to try to support people in these journeys.

Care for people who were nearing the end of their life was managed and communicated in a sensitive and dignified way.Staff support patients to make decisions about their care and treatment and their future, in some circumstances using DNACPR’s.