Pall Mall Medical Diagnostic Treatment Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. However, staff did not always adhere to GDPR. The information displayed by the service was not always up to date.

This service scored 50 (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 took account of patients’ individual needs and preferences. Staff made reasonable adjustments to help patients access services. Staff made the time explain theatre cases and aftercare post procedure to patient in a way they could understand. Patients we spoke to felt involved in planning their care and treatment.

Patients were given a choice of food and drink to meet their cultural and religious preferences.

There were 96% staff compliant with equality diversity training and 92% staff had completed autism awareness training.

Patients were always told the cost of treatments during their first consultation; they were given enough time between consultation to decide if treatment was in their best interest and make the right choice for them.

The provider told us that patient GP summaries were only requested where there was a medical need to do so.

Over the past 12 months, only one patient had failed to attend surgery without prior notice. This did not attend (DNA) case was unusual for the service. The service had systems in place to prevent DNAs such as consultation processes and pre-surgery calls 24-72 hours ahead of the day of surgery.

The service offered interpreter and translation services when required.

The service had a business continuity plan that was up to date.

We observed electronic computer systems were password protected; however, the generic password was on display in a clinical nursing room and could be clearly seen from the corridor. This is not in line with national guidance. Staff also left their computers logged on to attend patients, this is not line with general data protection regulations. We escalated our concerns at the end of our visit and asked the provider to take immediate action. The provider submitted evidence following our inspection showing action had been taken to improve.

All records of consent we reviewed contained the associated information about the procedure and the risks involved. Patients we spoke with felt the information and advice was communicated in a way they could understand. Service leaders told us they offered free, no-obligation, unlimited consultations with surgeons, giving patients the opportunity to ask questions, clarify concerns, and fully understand their options before making any decisions.

Staff told us they could call upon an interpreter for people whose first language was not English.

The service had up to date policies on Computer & Data Security and Caldicott Principles. Staff completed General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) mandatory training, the information from the service evidenced that 94% of clinical staff had completed this training and 81% had completed training on information governance.

The service had a mix of paper and electronic records.

Patients told us they knew how to complain or raise concerns. The service displayed information on how to provide feedback in some patient areas. The information displayed however was not always up to date, for instance the Independent Sector Complaints Adjudication Service certificate.

Staff understood the policy on complaints and knew how to handle them. Patients and relatives participated in the complaints process from beginning to end and the service sought to provide early resolution locally wherever possible. Service leaders told us they reviewed complaint trends and themes to improve services for patients and their relatives.

The service had an up-to-date complaints management policy. The ward team did not have regular meeting where complaints or learning could be discussed. However, the theatre team did have regular huddles which included discussion of complaints.

There was 90% of patients who felt involved in decisions about their care according to the latest November patient survey.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

People we spoke with felt involved in their care and treatment.

Staff we spoke to at the service were able to demonstrate an understanding of discrimination and inequality and told us that it was important patients felt listened to. The service had translation and interpreter services to ensure that language was never a barrier for patients receiving care.

Service leaders were determined to improve people’s experience, act on information about people's experiences and outcomes and allocate resources and opportunities to achieve equity. Patients had 24/7 access to a nurse, 365 days a year, to address any concerns or medical queries.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.