Hammersmith Private Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that safety was a priority at the hospital, and leaders embedded a culture of openness and collaboration. We checked that people were safe and protected from bullying, harassment, avoidable harm, neglect, abuse and discrimination.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 78 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a strong proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and complete honesty. Staff actively listened to concerns about safety and thoroughly investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were always learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. We saw that incidents were investigated, actions put in place and learning shared. We also saw that re-audits were undertaken to ensure that the actions taken had had an effect. This included an issue where increased blood loss had been noted and an amendment to the pre-operative questionnaire when a trend in increased venous thromboilsation was noted following patients taking long haul flights. The pre-operative questionnaire now asks about intended travel. Suggestions for improvement were from all grades of staff.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. The service requested five years' worth of medical records from the patients GP. This allowed the service to make informed decisions about the care they gave. Staff made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different areas of the service and in the postoperative period. The service had the appropriate contracts in place to ensure that systems were in place to promote the safety of patients. This included contracts with private ambulance providers, out of hours arrangements and arrangements for the handover of patients to others.

The service worked with people to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people's lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. Staff were appropriately trained to identify any potential safeguarding issues to ensure the safety of the patient. The service shared concerns quickly and appropriately with the patient's general practitioner.

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people's needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Co-ordinators and the surgeons worked with patients to ensure that their expectations for surgery were achievable and that they were managed. This information was reinforced by the surgeon. Appropriate patient selection and consultation ensured that patients were emotionally prepared for surgery.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. Staff could tell us about upgrades made to the building since we had last undertaken an onsite assessment. Staff made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. We saw that there were appropriate planned preventative maintenance schedules in place and we that equipment was checked regularly. Follow up care was offered by the service through an outpatient consultation or more regularly if they were concerned about their wound. Patients could contact staff 24 hrs a day as a member of staff was always on call. We observed an outpatient consultation with the tissue viability lead which was thorough and addressed the woman's individual needs.

who received effective support, supervision and development. We reviewed the skills and experience of staff and found these to be appropriate for the surgery undertaken. Staff worked together well to provide safe care that met people's individual needs. Staff we spoke with reported good working relationships across clinical and non-clinical teams. Patient records were robust and ensured that patients were kept safe. Records documented individual patient needs. Surgical staff were screened to ensure that they were appropriately qualified and experienced in their role to undertake the procedure.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. Staff detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. We saw that processes were in place for decontamination and waste services were compliant with health building notes00/09 and 00/10 in relation to infection control in the building environment. The theatre area was in the process of receiving an extra clean whilst we were on site. We reviewed cleaning schedules, chemical storage and spoke to the cleaning staff who were knowledgeable. We found that the service ensured a good level of cleaning was undertaken, monitored and audits undertaken.