You are here

Archived: Greenwich Primary Care Drug and Alcohol Service

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14 January 2014
Date of Publication: 23 January 2014
Inspection Report published 23 January 2014 PDF

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

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 14 January 2014, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Reasons for our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Records we reviewed showed that people had to sign consent forms giving the service permission to share information about the treatment they were receiving with various outside organisations such as the persons GP and social services. People were also required to sign programme treatment agreement forms which outlined the details of the treatment they would receive and provided consent that they would comply with the programme. We reviewed the files for ten people using the service and found that they all contained both signed consent forms and signed treatment agreements.

We spoke with two people who used the service about consent. One person told us that they could not remember if staff had asked them to sign consent forms but they were sure that if they had been they would have signed them. Another person said that they had signed some paper work consenting to receive help from staff with their recovery programme.

We spoke with four members of staff about consent. The registered manager told us that consent was gained when the initial assessment was carried out. Staff would explain to people with whom and why the information had to be shared. The consent form did highlight that it was not possible to use the service if the person did not consent to information sharing with their GP. This was because it was important that the service was able to have accurate information about people's medical history when prescribing medication. Three members of staff told us consent was regularly reviewed with people and initially discussed during the first assessment. We saw in one person's file that they had given consent to information sharing with various parties on different dates.

We asked staff what they would do if people appeared to lack capacity to give consent when attending for appointments and assessments. One person told us that at times people came to appointments under the influence of illicit drugs or alcohol. On these occasions provisions would be made to rearrange the appointment. Another said that if they had any concerns they would speak to the doctor based in the service and another person said they would try to explain things in a clear and simple manner. This was because at times people's ability to understand information was affected by how the information was being passed on.

We asked the registered manager if the provider had a consent policy in place. They told us that the organisation did not have a specific policy on consent but people came to the service either voluntarily or because of a court order. For people with a court order in place compliance with the treatment programme and consenting to treatment was compulsory.