7 December 2021
During a routine inspection
Our rating of this location stayed the same. We rated it 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, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. 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. Key services were available seven days a week.
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, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
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.
We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. We currently do not rate effective in outpatients and diagnostic imaging services.
However:
Patient records were not always kept securely.
Social distancing and personal protective equipment was not always used correctly in the surgical staff room.
Two disposable curtains in the diagnostic imaging department had not been replaced for over six months.
Defibrillation pads on the resuscitation trolley in theatres had expired two weeks before the inspection.
The enhanced recovery unit (ERU) was cluttered with equipment. Staff we spoke with were not aware that the ERU was not in use, or that it could be used in certain circumstances with sufficient notice for clearing and cleaning.
Patients privacy and dignity was not protected whilst checking in at reception in the diagnostic imaging department.