Archived: BPAS - Andover

Updated 21 October 2016

The Andover clinic consisted of one screening room and three consulting rooms.

Activity

• Between January 2015 and December 2015 the service carried out 168 medical abortions.

Safety

• No ‘never events’ (January 2015 to December 2015)

• One serious incident requiring investigation between January and December 2015

• All staff who were involved in the care of patients aged under 18 were trained to level three in safeguarding children and young people.

• There were no nursing staff vacancies as of December 2015.

Effective

• Information provided by BPAS showed that 100% of staff had completed an appraisal as of December 2015.

• Between April 2015 and March 2016 over 90% of patients were screened for chlamydia

Caring

• The BPAS Andover survey showed 100% of patients using termination services during April 2015 to December 2015 would recommend the service to someone who needed similar care

Responsive

• Between January and March 2016, Hampshire had to wait an average of 4.8 days for their first consultation. The percentage of consultation appointments available within seven calendar days was 90.1%. Patients waited on average 4.4 days from consultation to treatment.

• There had been one formal complaint between January and December 2015.

Well Led

• Legislation requires that for an abortion to be legal, two doctors must each independently reach an opinion in good faith as to whether one or more of the legal grounds for a termination is met. They must be in agreement that at least one and the same ground is met for the termination to be lawful and this is recorded on a HSA1 form. BPAS units completed monthly HSA1 audits to monitor legal requirements. The compliance of BPAS Andover with this audit was above 95% (April 2015 to March 2016).

• The response rate for patient feedback forms was 91%.

Updated 21 October 2016

BPAS Andover provided a compassionate, caring and non-judgemental service in line with BPAS values as an organisation. Sufficient staff were available with the skills and training to provide care. BPAS produced policies that took account of best practice policies and evidence based guidelines. For example, in line with Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecology (RCOG) guidance and the Required Standard Operating Procedures (RSOP) guidance from the Department of Health. BPAS also carried out its own research before the implementation of simultaneous early medical abortion up to nine weeks. Risk assessments and audits including how the service was adhering to legal requirements regarding completion and submission of HSA1 and HSA4 forms were undertaken. This information was reported monthly to head office as part of the organisation’s quality assurance processes. Incidents and complaints were reported, investigated and actions taken to reduce the recurrence. The unit manager recorded risks across the three units they managed in one risk register, which included control measures and review dates. The service had received one formal complaint in 2015 which had been investigated and improvements implemented.

All staff were trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults and children (level 3) and obtained advice from the unit safeguarding lead or national safeguarding leads as needed.

Clear suitability for treatment guidelines were followed. In cases where patients had complex medical needs, suitable alternative placements were identified to respond to their needs. All patients were offered a pregnancy options discussion with a client care coordinator as part of their consultation. The service signposted patients to the 24 hours seven days a week after care advice line and post abortion specialist counselling if the need arose. Patients were able to access services in a timely manner. Women in Hampshire had to wait an average of 4.8 days for their first consultation. The percentage of consultation appointments available within seven calendar days was 90.1%. Patients waited on average 4.4 days from consultation to treatment.

However, although infection control policies and procedures were monitored through audit, which consistently showed over 95% compliance since January 2015, the observational infection control audits had not been conducted as intended which potentially invalidated the results.

Updated 21 October 2016

We have not provided ratings for this service. We have not rated this service because we do not currently have a legal duty to rate this type of service or the regulated activities which it provides.