• Hospital
  • NHS hospital

Arrowe Park Hospital

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Arrowe Park Road, Wirral, Merseyside, CH49 5PE (0151) 678 5111

Provided and run by:
Wirral University Teaching Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Overall inspection

Requires improvement

Updated 14 January 2022

Arrowe Park Hospital is one of two hospital sites managed by Wirral University Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. The hospital is the main site and provides a full range of hospital services including emergency care, critical care, a comprehensive range of elective and non-elective general medicine (including elderly care) and surgery, a neonatal unit, children and young people’s services, maternity and gynaecology services and a range of outpatient and diagnostic imaging services.

We carried out an unannounced inspection of Urgent and Emergency Services and Medical Care at Arrowe Park Hospital on 19 and 20 October 2021. This was because of continuing concerns about the quality and safety of these services. The inspection took place during the COVID-19 global pandemic and at a time when NHS providers nationally were experiencing a high level of demand on their services.

Our rating of this location stayed the same. We rated it as requires improvement because:

  • The medical care service did not always have enough staff to care for patients. Not all staff had training in key skills, mandatory training compliance for medical staff did not meet trust targets.
  • Staff did not always identify and quickly act upon patients at risk of deterioration in the urgent and emergency department waiting room.
  • People could not always access the service when they needed it. Patients did not always receive timely care and treatment. Waiting times were not always in line with national standards.
  • In the urgent and emergency service some staff did not always feel respected, supported and valued by senior managers. The service did not always have an open culture where staff could raise concerns without fear.

However,

  • Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff managed medicines well.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
  • 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 patients, families and carers.
  • The services planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

Services for children & young people

Requires improvement

Updated 31 March 2020

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as requires improvement because:

  • The service had not provided training in key skills to staff, had not assessed risks to patients, was not compliant with key information sharing standards and had failed to control infection risk. There were not enough medical staff within the neonatal department and the design, use and maintenance of premises and equipment did not keep people safe.
  • Staff did not monitor patients pain regularly and the service did not ensure staff had the knowledge, skills or ability to care for patients with mental health needs or patients who lacked capacity.
  • 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 patients, families and carers.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • The strategy for the service did not align to significant challenges faced within it such as the care and treatment of children and young people suffering from mental health symptoms and gaps within governance processes such as local audits meant a lack of assurance.

Diagnostic imaging

Good

Updated 31 March 2020

We have not previously rated diagnostic imaging as a distinct service at this hospital. We rated it as good because:

  • The diagnostic imaging service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, 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 managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
  • Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
  • 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 patients, families and carers.
  • The diagnostic imaging service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service planned and managed services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However,

  • The diagnostic imaging services did not always provide care and treatment, or manage facilities, in line with good governance principles around evidence based practice.

Outpatients

Requires improvement

Updated 31 March 2020

We previously inspected outpatients jointly with diagnostic imaging so we cannot compare our new ratings directly with the previous ratings. We rated it as requires improvement because:

  • The service did not always control infection risk well. Staff used some control measures to protect patients, themselves and others from infection. The design, maintenance and use of facilities, premises and equipment did not always keep people safe. Nursing staff in ophthalmology did not use a tool to identify deteriorating patients.
  • People requiring routine treatment could not always access the service when they needed it. Waiting times from referral to treatment and arrangements to admit, treat and discharge patients were not always in line with national expectations.

However:

  • There were enough nursing staff to safely care for patients and mandatory training levels had been achieved. Safeguarding processes were in place and staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. They kept the premises visibly clean. The service used systems and processes to safely prescribe, administer, record and store medicines. The service managed patient safety incidents well.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
  • 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 patients, families and carers.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. The service had a vision for what it wanted to achieve and a strategy to turn it into action. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with staff and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

Surgery

Requires improvement

Updated 31 March 2020

  • The service did not always control infection risk well. Staff did not always asses the risks to patients. However, staff kept good care records. The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
  • Staff did not always monitor whether they gave patients enough to eat and drink. Patient outcomes did not always positive, consistent or met expectations. However, staff gave patients pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
  • 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 patients, families and carers.
  • People could not access the service when they needed it and had to wait too long for treatment. However, the service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback.
  • Leaders did not use systems to manage performance effectively. However, they supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.