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 get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

Patients’ needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual treatment plans. Patients we spoke with remembered being involved in their pre-operative assessments by the doctor and agreeing to the treatment. Files we checked confirmed that pre-operation assessments had been carried out by the doctors and nurses with the help of the patient, and in some cases their family members. The information took note of patients’ social and psychological needs.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure patients' safety and welfare. Patients’ care needs were followed up by risk assessments to make sure the treatment plan minimised the risk to patients. Doctors and nurses told us that all associated risks when choosing treatment were discussed with patients and patients made the final decision. This was evidenced by the consent to treatment forms patients had signed.

Patients’ care and treatment reflected relevant research and guidance. There were systems in place for staff to access the research governance framework from the Department of Health and other government departments. Governance in this context refers to processes and decisions that seek to define actions, grant power, and verify performance by the hospital governance board. There were also structures in place for professionals to access relevant policies and good practice guidance published by the Department of Health. Staff who spoke with us said that they used relevant, evidence-based guidance on good practice. They told us that medical alerts published were discussed at team meetings and at training sessions so that negative incidents were avoided.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that protected patients from unlawful discrimination. Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of equality and diversity. One staff said, “We are here to take care of the patients and make sure they are fit for discharge. I treat each person as an individual and appreciate no two people are alike.” Most patients we consulted assured us that staff were respectful and delivered care in a way that was non- discriminative. However, there were some comments by patients which highlighted that some staff would benefit by customer care awareness. We shared the comments with the hospital manager and the director of nursing.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the procedures to follow if a person required immediate medical attention. Heads of departments said that they had policies in place to deal with emergencies and that staff had training on this. They told us they had plans in place to cope with severe weather conditions so that patients would continue to receive service.