You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 14 September 2010 and 11 July 2011
Date of Publication: 3 February 2011
Inspection Report published 3 February 2011 PDF | 320.95 KB

Contents menu

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 14/09/2010, 11/07/2011, observed how people were being cared for, looked at records of people who use services, talked to staff and talked to people who use services.

Our judgement

Overall, we found that the Churchill Hospital was meeting this essential standard.

User experience

During our visit, patients reported that they had had the risks and benefits of treatment explained to them when consent for treatment had been required. In the inpatient survey, the trust scored 9 out of 10 for patients being given an explanation that they could understand about the risks and benefits of a procedure.

Other evidence

The trust has policies and procedures in place for obtaining consent and these have been recently reviewed. Staff were found to be knowledgeable about the consent process, including who had responsibility for various parts of the process. Patients also outlined that they had gone through the consent process, where it was required. They also commented that they had been provided with a good level of information, including the risks and benefits associated with different treatment options and/or clinical procedures.

The hospital has conducted audits of health records which included a review of consent processes. This audit showed that consent processes are generally followed, including recording the discussion of risks and benefits of procedures and treatments with patients. While all key elements of consent were being carried out, the audit provided showed that patients were not routinely being given a copy of their consent form. The trust has stated that it has worked to address this and that it continues to monitor this through ongoing review of patient’s health records.