Pioneer Wound Healing and Lymphoedema Centre

Updated 11 November 2022

Healogics Wound Healing and Lymphoedema Centre is provided by Pioneer Wound Healing and Lymphoedema Centres. The provider has been registered since December 2021 when it acquired the service from the previous provider. The provider also have five other registered locations in Sussex.

During this inspection, we visited two of the provider’s registered locations. We have therefore published this report on Healogics Wound Healing and Lymphoedema Centre – Eastbourne, and another report on the registered location Healogics Wound Healing and Lymphoedema Centre – Horsham. The provider describes the remaining four locations as smaller, satellite services and were not inspected.

Healogics Wound Healing and Lymphoedema Centres specialise in the provision of wound healing and lymphoedema services to NHS patients using an evidence-based systematic approach to chronic wound healing. The service is commissioned by NHS Sussex, whose role is to agree the strategic priorities and resource allocation for all NHS organisations in Sussex. NHS Sussex recently took over commissioning responsibility from local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs).

The Eastbourne centre is commissioned for both lymphoedema and wound care (including leg ulcers, diabetic foot ulcers, surgical wounds and pressure injuries). They see ambulatory patients (patients who can walk) at the clinic and support local NHS district nursing teams and nursing homes to provide domiciliary wound care for patients in the community.

The service is currently contracted to treat adults. Self-paying patients could access the same care provided to NHS patients, as well as some other services such as manual lymphatic drainage which is a technique used to massage patients with lymphoedema to reduce pain and discomfort.

The service registered with the Care Quality Commission in 2014. They are registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Treatment of disease, disorder, or injury
• Diagnostic and screening procedures
• Transport services, triage and medical advice provided remotely

At the time of this inspection the service had a registered manager.

The service was inspected when it was provided by the previous provider in February 2017 but was not rated.

Updated 11 November 2022

This was the first time we rated this service. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for people using the service and keep them safe. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They did not store or prescribe medicines. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
• Staff provided good care and treatment. Managers made sure staff were competent and supported staff to develop their skills through specialist training for tissue viability, wound care and lymphoedema management. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives and supported them to make decisions about their care.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to people using the service and made it easy for people to give feedback. The patients we spoke with were happy with their care and generally felt that they had a brilliant experience using the service.
• Managers were approachable and had the skills and knowledge to ensure patients received a quality service. Staff understood the service’s vision and values and how to apply them in their work. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities, and felt respected, supported and valued. All staff were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.

However:

• Staff were not fully compliant with all mandatory training.
• The provider had several policies which were out of date, and staff did not always know where to find them. The provider had no formal clinical supervision policy.
• Managers did not hold regular team meetings for all staff to share information, learning and feedback to continually improve care to patients. However, staff told us that they had daily safety meetings.

Updated 11 November 2022