You are here

Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital Good

The partners registered to provide this service have changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 25 August 2017

We rated Shrewsbury Court Independent Hospital as good because:’

  • Staff had completed monthly environmental assessments for all wards which included a comprehensive audit of potential ligature risks and had completed a programme of works to reduce or make-safe potential ligature points. Where these remained, a plan for mitigating these risks had been completed by staff and included as part of the audit.

  • Shifts were covered by sufficient qualified and experienced staff.

  • There was a qualified nurse on the ward area at all times. This was recorded on the daily shift planner. There were sufficient staff to safely carry out physical interventions and medical staff were available each day and on call at week-ends.

  • Staff were up to date with all mandatory training as evidenced in the staff training matrix.

  • All staff had completed safeguarding training and each ward had a named safeguarding lead.

  • Staff were monitoring patients’ physical health regularly, and all the wards had access to the practice nurse.

  • Medicine prescribing practices were audited weekly by the pharmacist.

  • Patients had access to individual and group psychology sessions.

  • All staff had regular clinical and management supervision.

  • Patients took part in a satisfaction survey in March 2017 with an 86% response rate, allowing the patients to have a voice and opinion on the hospital and their treatment.
  • The ward used key performance indicators to assess the quality of the care given, this included the provision of personalised activities, 1:1 time and use of section 17 leave.
  • Ward managers were the key decision makers for all ward based staff and they had access to administrative and managerial support when required.
Inspection areas



Updated 25 August 2017

We rated safe as good because:

  • Staff could observe all areas of the ward from the nurse’s station, directly or with the use of convex mirrors and close circuit television.

  • Staff responded rapidly and effectively when alarms were activated.

  • The clinic rooms contained emergency medical equipment including a defibrillator and epi-pens.

  • The provider had estimated the average number of staff required in accordance with a ratio of three patients to one staff member, and the ward manager had authority to increase the levels of staffing in accordance with the circumstances of the ward.

  • Patients told us that they regularly received 1:1 time with staff, and that they received their section 17 leave and that ward activities were never cancelled.

  • All staff were trained in de-escalation techniques and were able to describe a range of techniques that would be used prior to using physical restraint.

  • Up to date comprehensive risk assessments had been completed by staff in all of the 28 care records we reviewed.

  • A clear record of contraband restrictions for each patient was listed in their care records and any restrictions were recorded and reviewed every month.

  • Staff were aware of what to record and how to record incidents. If things had gone wrong with a patient’s care or treatment, staff wrote a letter of apology to the patient.

  • Staff held monthly incident management review meetings where action plans were formulated and they made changes to patient care due to lessons learned from reviewing incidents.



Updated 25 August 2017

We rated effective as good because:

  • All care plans were securely stored on the hospital’s electronic record system.

  • Treatment plans were comprehensive and reflected the needs of the patients.

  • Staff followed national institute for health and care excellence (NICE) guidance when prescribing medication.

  • Ward based staff took part in clinical audits, including checks on the status of bedding, and missed doses in medicines management.

  • A full range of appropriately qualified and experienced multidisciplinary staff including occupational health workers were available to the patients.

  • All staff had undergone an induction programme and this was recorded on the training matrix.

  • Each ward had a responsible clinician that led on all clinical care for the patients on their ward.

  • Each ward held two effective handovers a day at the start of both day and night shifts.

  • Multidisciplinary patient focussed meetings were held weekly on the ward.



Updated 25 August 2017

We rated caring as good because:

  • All interactions observed between staff and patients were respectful and relaxed.

  • Patients told us that all staff were kind and helpful.

  • Patients were confident that they were able to keep their property and possessions safe on the ward.

  • All wards had a patient representative who led the ward planning meetings and attended the hospital meetings.

  • All care plans were signed by the patient and the majority had comments from the patient written on the plan.

  • The hospital held quarterly carers forums in order to share information about the hospital and gain feedback from the carers.

  • Risk assessments were informed by patients reporting how they were feeling with regard to particular risk factors, and risk assessments were updated accordingly.



Updated 25 August 2017

We rated responsive as good because:

  • Patients had access to the physical health care nurse.

  • Patients were able to make calls from a cordless ward phone which could be used in the quiet room or in their bedroom.

  • Meals were prepared from fresh ingredients in the kitchen on site.

  • Patients were able to personalise their bedroom space.

  • There was access to activities during the week chosen by the patients at their community meetings and each patient had an individualised activity plan.

  • Access to a translation service was available to support patients at ward rounds.

  • There were notices and leaflets for patients providing information on the Mental Health Act, medicines information and guidance on how to make a complaint.



Updated 25 August 2017

We rated well-led as good because:

  • Staff were in frequent contact with the Clinical Services Manager and the Hospital Director who were both regularly present on the wards.

  • The ward used key performance indicators to assess the quality of the care given, this included the provision of personalised activities, 1:1 time and use of section 17 leave.

  • Ward managers were the key decision makers for all ward based staff and they had access to administrative and managerial support when required.

  • Staff were able to submit items to the newly established risk register.

  • We saw evidence that staff were open and transparent when things went wrong.

  • Staff were able to input into service development and to give feedback on current service provision and treatment practices.

Checks on specific services

Long stay or rehabilitation mental health wards for working age adults


Updated 25 August 2017

Start here...