Furness Renal Centre

We rated this service as ​good​ because:

• 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. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.

• 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 and people visiting the local area, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it.

• 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 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.

However;

• Staff had not undertaken specific training for Learning Disability and Autism awareness, which had been mandatory for healthcare providers since July 2022. Following the inspection, the provider submitted evidence to show that all staff had now completed this training.

• Following the inspection, the service had ensured patients were prescribed oxygen. Staff needed time to embed the systems and processes being developed for the prescribing of oxygen in the clinic, through the use of Patient Group Directions (PGDs) where appropriate.

• Staff had not received a formal appraisal since commencing at the service, however a new appraisal system had been introduced with all staff to have completed a mid-year review by the end of July 2023. Following the inspection, the provider submitted further evidence to show that all staff have now received a mid-year review with an appraisal scheduled.

• The service did not always display up to date policies or information in staff and public areas.

• The service had not ensured that the curtains between patients’ bays had been changed in line with their documented replacement date.

• The service had not ensured that the COSHH (Control of Substances Hazardous to Health) risk assessment was up to date. The one in use for safe practice with a COSHH substance was not location specific and was out of date. It stated staff were required to wear goggles however staff dealt with the substance in tablet form and not powder form, as specified in the risk assessment, so goggles were no longer required.

• The service made sure that all required safety checks were performed and recorded by staff but the staff we spoke with were not aware of what the upper and lower limits of some parameters were. This posed a risk of staff not knowing when to report and escalate out of range results.