Early Days Baby Scan Ltd

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs.

We looked for evidence that people and communities were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of people and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that people could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The service delivered care that was tailored to the individual needs and preferences of people using the service. Flexible appointment arrangements and an online booking system enabled people to identify suitable appointments and provide additional information about their requirements in advance.

Staff aimed to create a personalised experience by taking time to understand people's expectations and individual circumstances, including any anxieties relating to their pregnancy. During appointments, people were encouraged to ask questions and were provided with explanations that met their individual needs. The service supported people to share the experience with partners and family members where appropriate, helping to ensure care reflected what mattered to them.

The service promoted privacy, dignity and choice throughout the scanning journey and sought feedback from people to understand their experiences and inform service improvement.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service planned and delivered care in a way that met the needs of the local population. Effective links with local NHS maternity services, GPs and hospitals supported integrated working and ensured that people could access appropriate follow-up care when required. Information was shared promptly and securely with relevant healthcare professionals, with consent, to support continuity of care.

The service ensured people received consistent support throughout their journey. Comprehensive information was provided before appointments, findings were explained during the scan, and where concerns were identified, clear advice and onward referral pathways were in place. People could contact the service for further guidance following their appointment, helping to ensure continuity of care and ongoing support.

Services met people's needs in a timely way. Same-day appointments were available, and people were encouraged to contact the provider directly if they were unable to find a suitable appointment slot.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People were provided with information about the service before, during and after their appointment. Information on the provider's website described the scans available, associated costs and what people could expect during their visit.

Women received information before their scan and completed consent documentation to confirm they understood the nature and purpose of the service. Staff explained scan findings during appointments and provided scan reports and images where appropriate.

The service made people aware of circumstances in which they should seek advice from their GP, midwife or NHS maternity service. Staff were able to arrange interpreter support where required to help ensure people could understand the information provided.

Information about how to raise concerns or provide feedback was also available.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service encouraged people to share feedback about their experience. Following appointments, people received information which included links to external feedback platforms should they wish to provide comments about the service. People could also contact the service directly by telephone, email or social media with feedback, queries or concerns.

The provider had a complaints policy in place which outlined how concerns would be managed. The service had not received any complaints in the 12 months prior to the inspection.

Arrangements for seeking and receiving feedback were appropriate to the size and scope of the service.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff told us they considered individual needs when arranging appointments and undertaking scans. Information about the service, appointments and scans was available to prospective patients before they attended.

Although the service was privately funded and accessed on a self-pay basis, we saw evidence that the provider had considered the needs of diverse groups of people and sought to reduce potential barriers to accessing the service.

The service had taken steps to make its facilities and appointments accessible to a range of people. The premises were located on the ground floor and were accessible to wheelchair users. An accessible toilet was available, and the service could accommodate people with bariatric needs. Interpreter services could be arranged where required and appointments were available at various times to provide flexibility for people accessing the service. The service also accepted women under the age of 18.

Most information about the service was provided through the provider's website, which included details about the scans available, costs and what people could expect during their appointment. Information was available in English. Staff told us they had not identified a demand for written information in other languages, although interpreter services could be arranged where required.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff were trained in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

Staff used information people provided about themselves in advance of people attending for appointments to ensure an equitable service could be provided for all.

Staff used feedback to ensure that all people received equitable experiences and outcomes. There were clear processes for rescans where, for example, it had not been possible to confirm a gender due to positioning.

The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

The provider had considered the future sustainability of the service. Although they had no plans to expand the business, they monitored demand, maintained equipment and ensured staff training and policies remained up to date to support the ongoing delivery of the service.