You are here

Royal Cornwall Hospital Requires improvement

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 29 May 2013
Date of Publication: 16 July 2013
Inspection Report published 16 July 2013 PDF

Overview

Inspection carried out on 29 May 2013

During a routine inspection

The inspection was carried out on 28 and 29 May 2013 with two compliance inspectors, a national professional advisor and an expert by experience. We looked at five outcome areas. In particular; clinical care quality assurance processes, follow up of children�s services inspection reports from 2011 and 2012, disabled access and staff support systems.

We spoke with 15 patients and observed staff and patients on a variety of wards and departments including the maternity department, gynaecology department and ward, cardiology wards, trauma wards, gastroenterology wards, children�s wards and the dermatology department, which included day surgery. Comments from patients we spoke with were positive and they praised the care, support and treatment they had received. One patient told us �the nurses have got a lot to do, little time to do it and they�ve got to do the best they can� the same patient also said �the girls here are marvellous and compassionate with each other�. On another ward a patient told us �the staff on X are brilliant, though they generally need more staff�. A different patient told us �the nurses have a very good attitude.

We spoke to over 50 staff including the medical director, interim nurse executive, head of quality and safety and quality improvement manager, tissue viability consultant nurse, speciality director and governance lead in dermatology, psychiatric liaison nurse, divisional general manager and divisional director of surgery, trauma and orthopaedics, head of learning and organisational development, learning and development nurse, divisional nurse for anaesthetics and theatres, the responsible officer for revalidation, divisional director of women, children and sexual health, child protection named nurse, divisional nurse � head of midwifery, cardiac catheter laboratory manager, coronary care unit manager, matron for child health, head of estates operations and head of human resources business partners. On the wards and departments we visited we also spoke to nurses, midwives, healthcare assistants and housekeeping staff.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the trust had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

The trust has taken steps to provide care in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. We found that disabled parking provided could cause difficulties for people with mobility problems due to the distance from the spaces to the pay and display machines.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

The hospital had appropriate quality assurance processes in place to monitor and improve the services they provided. However a number of the patients we spoke with had not been advised of the process to follow if they had any concerns about treatment or staff.