East Anglia Ultrasound Services

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

This means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.
At our last assessment we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this assessment, this key question has changed to good.
This meant that peoples outcomes were consistently good.

We have not awarded this service a score for Effective.

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

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs with them.
At the last assessment it was identified that the service was not ensuring a fully holistic approach to assessing people’s needs. People's medical questionnaires did not include questions about accessibility and communication needs. Staff were not always aware of people's additional needs until they arrived for their appointment.
On this follow-up assessment, the service had made changes and improvements to the medical questionnaires. The questionnaires now included questions around the need for interpreters, disabilities, and any need for other assistance. This enabled the service to make reasonable adjustments and provide additional support if necessary. Sonographers had their own calendar, making them aware of the people coming into the service that may require additional support or extra time at the appointment; this also included any requests for a chaperone.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

At the last inspection it was identified that leaders did not ensure consistent implementation of nationally recognised guidance and standards relating to quality and safety within the service. There was not an established process for conducting routine quality and safety checks on ultrasound equipment. Refillable gel bottles were used within the service, which did not comply with the 2021 National Patient Safety alert.
Staff had not completed training on supporting patients with learning disabilities and autism.
Leaders had not ensured that clinical protocols provided staff with clear, comprehensive and up-to-date guidance for performing the full range of examinations offered by the service, or for making appropriate patient referrals. This was not in line with national guidance (SoR and BMUS ‘Guidelines for Professional Ultrasound Practice’ 2023).
Service policies did not always reflect the services provided. The service was not following processes and audits in line with their own policies.
At the follow up assessment, we found improvements had been made. Quality and safety checks were completed with all equipment serviced and Portable Appliance Tested (PAT). Refillable ultrasound gel bottles were no longer used and had been replaced with individual bottles reducing infection risk. All staff had completed training to support people with learning disabilities and autism.
Clinical protocols were now clear and up to date. Staff had access to up-to-date protocols and guidance in performing the full range of examinations that was offered by the service, bringing them in line with national guidance.
We reviewed service policies which were in date and version controlled. The policies now reflected the services provided.
Ultrasound images and reporting were audited and monitored monthly to ensure staff competency and Quality Assurance (QA). This was now in line with the services own policies.
Staff had individual training files documenting training, continued professional development and competencies. Staff electronically signed policies and protocols to indicate that they have read them.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

At the last inspection it was identified that leaders did not implement a structured programme of regular audits to assess quality of care provided. This included the absence of audits for ultrasound examinations and corresponding reports. This was not in line with the professional guidance from the Society of Radiographers (SoR)and The British Medical Ultrasound Society (BMUS) 2023.
At the follow up assessments, improvements had been made to the auditing and monitoring of images and reports. The Registered Manager (RM) reviewed all images taken each day for image quality. If the quality of the image was found to be below the standard required, the RM also reviewed the amount of time the sonographer spent with the person, to ensure the scan had not been rushed, impacting the quality of the scan image produced. Each month, 3 scans from each sonographer were reviewed and audited in its entirety for image quality, reporting and referral. The RM was also a practicing sonographer, their scans were reviewed and audited by their peers. Any concerns regarding image quality or reporting was discussed with the sonographer and documented.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.