Ultrasound Diagnostic Services

Updated 19 October 2021

Ultrasound Diagnostic Services is operated by Ultrasound Diagnostic Services. The service was established in 1977 and has been managed by Ultrasound Diagnostic Services since 2012. The service offers diagnostic tests for adults and young people. Patients are offered ultrasound scans for obstetrics and gynaecology. This included scans at various stages during pregnancy, fetal echocardiography, lower abdominal and pelvic scans and ovarian cancer screening. The service had three diagnostic imaging rooms and a reception area in the basement.

The service was last inspected on 27 November 2018 and a report was published on the 19 February 2019. Following the 2018 inspection, the diagnostic imaging service was rated as requires improvement and was served one Requirement Notice for failing to comply with Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014: Regulation 17 Good governance.

Updated 19 October 2021

Ultrasound Diagnostic Services is operated by Ultrasound Diagnostic Services. The service was established in 1977 and has been managed by Ultrasound Diagnostic Services since 2012. The service offers diagnostic tests for adults and young people.

Patients are offered ultrasound scans for obstetrics and gynaecology. This included scans at various stages during pregnancy, fetal echocardiography, lower abdominal and pelvic scans and ovarian cancer screening. The service had three diagnostic imaging rooms and a reception area in the basement.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out an unannounced inspection on 27 November 2018.

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.

Services we rate

We rated it as requires improvement overall.

• The service had a strong, visible person-centred culture. Staff were highly motivated and aspired to offer care that was kind and promoted people’s dignity.
• Patient’s individual needs and preferences were central to the planning and delivery of the service. The services were flexible and provided choice.
• The service had systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service. The use of audits and recording of information related to the service performance was to a good standard.
• The centre was clean and tidy with infection control processes in place. There were no reported infections in the last 12 months.
• Staff were positive about their working experience and felt supported to be part of a team.
• Patients spoken with and feedback we received about the service was positive. There was a 24-hour turnaround for patients from their initial contact to having their scan done at the centre.
• The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and abuse and to provide the right care and treatment.
• Staff demonstrated kindness and understanding of how to meet patients’ needs to ensure that their experience was positive.
• There was an effective maintenance schedule for all equipment.
• There was effective multidisciplinary team working between the service’s staff and other staff at different provider locations.
• Patients had the choice of booking the dates and times of their diagnostic imaging appointments to suits their needs.

We found areas of practice that require improvement:

• The service did not have an effective risk management system for monitoring and mitigating the various risks arising from the undertaking of the regulated activities.
• The service did not have a designated safeguarding lead trained to level three in safeguarding children.
• Not all sonographers within the service had professional indemnity insurance. Independent sonographers are required to have suitable professional indemnity in place so they are protected if a medical negligence claim is made against them.
• The service did not ensure that policies and procedures are reviewed regularly.
• The service had not completed infection control and hand hygiene audits.
• The service did not have an effective system for reviewing incidents or significant events with a view to preventing further occurrences and ensuring that improvements are made as a result.
• The service did not maintain accurate, complete and detailed records for staff, such as references and evidence of immunisation against Hepatitis B.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations and that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. We also issued the provider with a requirement notice that affected Ultrasound Diagnostic Services. Details are at the end of the report.

Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (London and the South Eas

Updated 25 February 2019

We rated the service as requires improvement

The service did not have an effective risk management system for monitoring and mitigating the various risks arising from the undertaking of the regulated activities.

The service did not have a designated safeguarding lead trained to level three in safeguarding children.

Not all sonographers within the service had professional indemnity insurance. Independent sonographers are required to have suitable professional indemnity in place so they are protected if a medical negligence claim is made against them.

The service did not ensure that policies and procedures are reviewed regularly.

The service did not have an effective system for reviewing incidents or significant events with a view to preventing further occurrences and ensuring that improvements are made as a result.

The service did not maintain accurate, complete and detailed records for staff, such as references and evidence of immunisation against Hepatitis B.