You are here

Archived: Claremont Hospital

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 8 January 2014
Date of Publication: 6 February 2014
Inspection Report published 06 February 2014 PDF | 85.84 KB

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

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 8 January 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff, reviewed information given to us by the provider and reviewed information sent to us by other regulators or the Department of Health. We talked with other regulators or the Department of Health.

Our judgement

Patients’ privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Patients’ views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care and treatment.

Reasons for our judgement

Patients who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. Patients told us that the treatment they had received was their choice and they were not pressurised into making any decisions that they did not agree with.

The doctors and nurses said they helped patients make informed decisions by ensuring patients were aware of the risks involved in the treatment options. They told us patients were given information so that they were able to balance any risks against their preferred treatment options. Doctors told us that patients were given time to think about the available options and enabled to decide on a suitable treatment. One of the examples we were given was, when a patient requested surgery to solve a health problem and expressed their preference for a quick surgical solution. A surgeon explained they gave the patient options appropriate for the condition and it was not necessarily surgery. They said it could well be physiotherapy or alternative treatment. This meant patients were given choices to make the right decision for them.

Patients were given information in a way they were able to understand. Patients said that they expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their treatment. Doctors told us they used different methods when explaining their diagnosis to patients and the way each treatment option would benefit them. They said often they used diagrams that illustrated the patient’s condition. Staff told us that most patients had a good understanding of English. However for those who needed help they used interpreters. This was identified at the pre-admission stage and they made appropriate arrangements. Patients said they were also given plenty of time to consider the treatment plans before having to decide. They were able to discuss the treatment plan with their family members and explore other options. This meant patients were able to understand the treatment options.

Patients were supported in promoting their independence. Patients explained that doctors, nurses and other professionals who came into contact with them respected their rights to maintain independence and encouraged them to influence their treatment. One patient said, “I want to get back to what I was like. I like keeping busy and being independent. Once I get better at walking I know I will get my independence back.” Patients we spoke with were confident that their life would be better once they received the treatment and recuperation.

Patients received necessary support when they were discharged from the hospital. We were informed by the medical and nursing staff that the pre-operative assessment gave them an opportunity to find out the home circumstances and the family support patients were able to receive. They said this was taken into account at the point of discharge so that they were able to involve appropriate services to ensure patients received the necessary support on discharge. They said they involved the patient’s GP and community services, such as occupational therapists, physiotherapist and the district nurses to help with patient’s recuperation.

Patients’ diversity, values and human rights were respected. We were given examples where staff had taken action to ensure patients’ diversity and human rights were respected and protected. Staff told us where patients had difficulty communicating or understanding what was said they sought help from family members or advocates. The hospital managers told us that staff had received training on equality, diversity and human rights. Staff were knowledgeable and appreciative of the importance of valuing people’s rights and respecting diversity. Patients told us that most staff valued their rights and treated them with respect.