You are here

Archived: Queen Mary's Hospital, Sidcup

This service is now managed by a different provider - see new profile


Inspection carried out on 22 October 2012

During a routine inspection

People using the service we spoke with said the standard of care they received at Queen Mary�s Hospital, Sidcup (QMS) was good and that they were well looked after. One person said; �the nurses do such a wonderful job, and there are plenty of them�. People said they had been given information beforehand about their operation and that they could discuss their care and treatment with the staff. People told us staff were cheerful and helpful. They were happy with the arrangements made for their medicines and said they had been given enough information about their medicines.

There was a range of views among people we spoke with about the food provided by the hospital. Most found it satisfactory; a few said it was nice and a few said it was not appetising.

People we spoke with said the hospital was very clean and hygienic and well equipped. One person said; �it�s very quiet and it�s the cleanest hospital I�ve ever been in�.

We found that care and treatment was planned and delivered in ways that met people�s needs. People were supported to have adequate nutrition and hydration, and were protected from the risks of acquiring a healthcare associated infection and from the risks associated with medicines. Equipment was maintained so that it worked properly and was available in sufficient quantities. People�s medical records were fit for purpose and held securely.

During a check to make sure that the improvements required had been made

Following our inspection on 17 February 2012 we asked the trust on 26 September 2012 to provide information to demonstrate it had made the required improvements in relation to consent to care and treatment at Queen Mary�s Hospital, Sidcup.

The trust submitted the requested information on 01 October 2012. This information demonstrated that the trust had made the requested improvements. The trust was taking forward the recommendations of the consent audit completed at the beginning of 2011 and was improving the proportion of staff receiving mental capacity act training.

Inspection carried out on 28 August and 4 September 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Some of the people we spoke with during our visit on 04 September 2012 told us the care they had received was very good. They told us staff were competent, friendly and helpful. For example, one person said; �The staff are good at what they do. They�ve really treated me well�. Another person said; �The reception staff were really good when I asked for directions�.

One of the three clinics being held in the outpatients department on the morning of our visit was running 50 to 60 minutes late. There was a notice on display apologising for this. People we spoke with were confident they would get good care once they were seen; however, a few people felt a delay of more than 30 minutes was not acceptable. We saw people being seen punctually for another clinic.

Some people told us that they had received timely information about their outpatient appointment and had appreciated the follow up call from the hospital. Some other people said they had waited quite a while for an appointment and had to chase it up.

Inspection carried out on 21 March 2012

During a themed inspection looking at Termination of Pregnancy Services

We did not speak to people who used this service as part of this review. We looked at a random sample of medical records. This was to check that current practice ensured that no treatment for the termination of pregnancy was commenced unless two certificated opinions from doctors had been obtained.

Inspection carried out on 17 January 2012

During an inspection in response to concerns

South London Healthcare Trust was created in April 2009 following the merger of Queen Mary's Hospital (Sidcup), Queen Elizabeth Hospital (Woolwich) and the Princess Royal University Hospital (Farnborough): there are also services at two smaller locations at Orpington Hospital and Beckenham. The trust covers a large area of outer south east London and Kent and employs approximately six thousand staff. Most staff are employed in one of the three acute hospital sites although there are satellite sites and clinics as well.

Since the trust has been in operation CQC has been contacted by a number of staff members who suggested there was a bullying culture within the trust. These staff members said there was a climate within the trust which made people scared of speaking out. CQC was aware of media interest in the Trust. Some stories referred to incidents and treatment of staff that occurred before the trust existed but reported them as occurring under the current configuration. We were also aware of local campaign groups campaigning on behalf of individual members of staff who alleged they had been bullied and treated unfairly because of being whistleblowers.

The Commission has a role in supporting whistleblowers and as a result of the volume of concerning information we took action to determine whether the trust is compliant with Regulation 23 (Outcome 14) � supporting workers.

This inspection was to specifically monitor the trust policies, procedures and monitoring of Outcome 14 with regard to the management of whistle blowing across all locations.

During an unannounced inspection of the Queen Mary Hospital site a CQC compliance manager (CM) asked the Chief Executive of the trust for use of an office in which to meet with any member of staff who considered themselves to be a whistleblower. An �all staff� email was sent inviting staff to the office for a confidential meeting with the compliance manager where they would be able to confidentially raise issues. At the end of the day another �all staff� email was sent giving all trust staff the mobile number and email address of the CM with an invitation to contact them over a 14 day period.

On the day of the unannounced inspection two members of staff came to meet with the CM. Over the following 14 days six further members of staff contacted the CM directly. All of the staff members who contacted us were clinicians; either nursing or medical staff.

Inspection carried out on 17 February 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Patients we spoke with at Queen Mary�s Hospital told us that the staff were �wonderful�

A patient with learning disabilities said the staff were �great� and took time to explain everything to him

Patients we spoke with were generally positive about the food provided to them, and told us that they were offered a good choice of food. One said: �The food�s been very good, every day�. Others said that the food was good but could be hotter when it was served.

People we spoke with told us that they received their medicines on time, and were not left in pain; they had been given information about their medicines verbally on the wards, and were satisfied with how their medicines were managed.

One patient had concerns about the way their night-time medicines had been given to them on one occasion, although they were happy with the arrangements for their medicines at all other times.

Patients we spoke to told us that mobility aids and exercise and physiotherapy equipment had been supplied to them promptly.

One patient told us: �If you had other wards like this in the NHS you�d have no problem�.

Inspection carried out on 23 September 2010

During a routine inspection

Overall, people who use services at Queen Mary�s Hospital Sidcup told us they were happy with the care they received. Most of them praised nursing staff who they said were caring and kind. However, they also said they didn�t think there were always enough staff on duty. Staff told us that they liked working at the hospital although many said they are worried about changes to the trust overall and how this will affect them.