The Priory Hospital Hemel Hempstead

Updated 5 September 2018

The Priory Hospital Hemel Hempstead is part of the Priory Healthcare Limited group of hospitals. Priory Hospital Hemel Hempstead provides long stay rehabilitation care and treatment for male and female patients with enduring mental health problems, and who may be detained under the Mental Health Act 1983, in a locked environment.

The hospital has 38 inpatient beds, across three wards and offers psychiatry, psychology, rehabilitation, and wellbeing therapies. At the time of this inspection, there were 30 patients and 24 of these were detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.

Priory Hospital Hemel Hempstead is registered by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) for:

• Assessment and medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.

• Treatment for Disease, Disorder, and Injury.

• Accommodation for persons who require treatment for substance misuse.

The provider had a registered manager and controlled drugs accountable officer.

The CQC has inspected the provider on four occasions. The last inspection was on 06 May 2016 and the Hospital were given an overall rating of good. Following this inspection, the provider was told to take the following actions to improve:

• The provider should implement governance procedures to show how and when they review the need for the ongoing restrictive practices, regarding patient access to the kitchen on Dove ward.

• The provider should consider exploring the use of recognised recovery focussed care planning, along with positive risk-taking assessment tools. This would then clearly show how patients had been involved in their care planning, reflecting their strengths, and support the hospitals vision of being a recovery focussed service.

• The provider should ensure that all staff are trained in Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act.

The provider had taken appropriate actions in relation to these breaches of regulations.

Updated 5 September 2018

We rated the Priory Hospital Hemel Hempstead as good because:

• The wards were clean, presentable and very well maintained.
• Rotas examined showed that the actual nurse numbers matched the estimated number on most shifts.
• Staff undertook a risk assessment of every patient on admission and updated this every six months and after every incident.
• Staff could explain what a safeguarding incident was and how to raise an alert.
• We found that staff received feedback from investigation of incidents and that staff were aware of lessons learnt.
• Staff completed comprehensive and timely assessments and physical examinations for all patients on admission.
• The percentage of non-medical staff that had an appraisal in the last 12 months was 100%.
• We saw positive caring interactions between the staff and patients in the service.
• Patients were involved in their care planning. All patients were given copies of their care plans unless they said that they did not want a copy.
• Patients had open access to outside space during the day, in line with the Mental Health Act Code of Practice guidance.
• The provider had set visions and values. We saw that the vision and values were displayed across the service and embedded into staff day to day practice.
• Staff knew the senior managers in the organisation and confirmed that they were often visible on the wards were accessible, and listened to staff when needed.
• Managers had a strong influence and good oversight of the wards.
• The provider submitted training data prior to inspection of mandatory training, which showed compliance of 82%. Overall training figures on the day of inspection for mandatory training, was 96% for permanent staff and 88% for bank staff.

However:

• There was not always a sufficient number of staff on Wren ward. We found that the number of staff did not reflect care needs.
• Of the 30 medication charts reviewed two (eight percent), did not have an up to date treatment form attached.
• The quality of some of the Mental Capacity Act assessments were not comprehensive.
• We found that not all staff were in receipt of regular supervision. The data given by the provider showed that 81% of staff were in receipt of supervision, against a provider target of 93%.
• There was no disabled access to Dovecote.

Updated 5 September 2018