Liverpool Urgent Treatment Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that people were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. We assessed all quality statements from this key question. At our last assessment in November 2018, at this assessment the rating remains good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We observed that staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. If needed staff would use a consultation room for private conversations with patients and families. All consultation rooms had a curtain to maintain privacy during an intimate examination. We spoke with four patients who all reported they had been treated with kindness, compassion and staff had listened to them. Staff we spoke with explained the importance of taking time to communicate with patients in their own language with sufficient time and explanations.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. Staff took account of people’s abilities, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics. When spoken with they described how they took account of the personal, cultural, social and religious needs of patients. For example, the service was aware that access to services could be a barrier for patients with a learning disability, so they invited a specialist in to undertake an assessment of the service, the environment and information available to such patients. The assessment had identified several improvements were needed and all staff were engaged with these discussions.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The four people we spoke to said they were listened to, given choices and given sufficient information

about how the service worked and about their care and treatment. There was information available in the waiting area that detailed the different stages of the journey through the urgent treatment centre. The length of wait to be seen was also displayed. To support people with additional learning needs, including autism and learning disabilities, a visual tool had been introduced to help prepare people for their visit to the urgent treatment centre by outlining what to expect at each stage of their journey. This was designed to increase independence by reducing anxiety and improving communication enabling people to understand and participate in their care. A sensory box was also available to help reduce people’s stress and anxiety. The service had worked with people with a learning disability to improve the environment and communication. Staff told us how they would ensure the views of carers were considered. They told us how they would also ask people if they had communication aids such as a communication passport to help them participate more fully in their care.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. Members of the reception team were provided with training in basic life support, including the signs and symptoms of sepsis. There was a system for patient assessment and triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services promptly.

Staff were trained to identify and signpost people requiring urgent attention such as sepsis or cardiac arrest. Partnership working with local ambulance services, community services and local emergency services had led to joint working to establish Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to ensure patients were transferred across services to meet urgent and immediate needs, safely and promptly. At times the medical emergency team were called upon to attend to and treat patients with urgent care needs within the service and SOPs were in place for this.

Pathways to support staff to refer people with immediate needs were in place, for example, to accident and emergency, mental health services and specialist treatment centres, such as the Burns Unit. A protocol was in place for receiving patients during major incidents when mass casualties were anticipated. The service had a system in place that alerted staff to any specific safety or clinical needs of a person using the service.

The provider had systems and processes in place to promote the wellbeing of their staff to enable staff to deliver person-centred care. This included providing the necessary resources and facilities for safe working. Staff were supported with reasonable adjustments and requests for flexible working were considered. There were a range of policies and procedures to support staff in the workplace and staff had access to occupational health and wellbeing services.

We found that staff had the opportunity to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service during staff meetings. Staff surveys had been undertaken by the provider but responses to this were low. Staff told us they felt valued and supported by colleagues and leaders both professionally and personally. They told us if there was a traumatic case or incident they would be well supported by managers. Leaders recognised and met the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and newly developed rest areas. We were told that all staff had the opportunity to discuss and raise concerns at listening events named Your Voice Your Change. The service also had monthly visits from senior managers to talk with staff and gather their views and opinions. We saw action plans were drawn up after these meetings to identify actions taken in response to staff issues raised. However, several staff told us they had repeatedly raised concerns about low staffing levels, they felt this impacted on training opportunities and they felt their concerns were not acknowledged or addressed by management.