Brighton & Hove Clinic

Updated 21 August 2019

The Brighton and Hove Clinic is an independent hospital and is part of the Elysium Healthcare group. It had previously been part of The Priory Group until September 2016. This was the second inspection of the location under Elysium Healthcare. When the first inspection was carried out the hospital was supporting adults and was found to be good in all of the key areas we looked at.

In September 2018 the hospital changed its registration to include supporting children aged 13-18. The hospital provides inpatient care for young people who have needs related to their mental health and who are detained under the Mental Health Act 1983, Mental Capacity Act 2005, or are voluntarily staying at the hospital. All of the young people at the hospital have a primary diagnosis of an eating disorder.

The hospital is a single ward, 18-bed, mixed-gender unit with ensuite bedrooms.

The site also has a community adult health hospital co-located on the ground floor. However, this hospital was separated by coded, locked doors and CCTV which ensured the young people were separated from the adult hospitals.

The hospital is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983
• Diagnostic and screening procedures
• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury

At the time of the inspection the hospital did not have a permanent registered manager and hospital director although there was an acting hospital manager in place.

During the inspection we were told that a permanent manager had been appointed but had not yet come into post as they were working out their notice period from their current employer, they were due to start within three months of the inspection.

Updated 21 August 2019

We rated The Brighton and Hove Clinic as good because :

• The service provided safe care for children and young people. The ward environment was safe and clean. The ward had enough nurses and doctors. Staff assessed and managed risk well. They minimised the use of restrictive practices and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding. Activities within the service and out in the local area were geared towards children and young people .
• Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments which were suitable to the needs of the young people, in a format and language that reflected young people and their family’s involvement and in line with national guidance about best practice.
• The ward team had access to the full range of specialists and education opportunities required to meet the needs of the young people on the ward. Managers ensured that these staff received relevant training, group clinical supervision and appraisal. The ward staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team alongside staff from the education team and with those outside the ward who would have a role in providing aftercare.
• Staff understood and discharged their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 including Gillick competency and Fraser guidelines. They followed good practice with respect to young people’s competency and capacity to consent to or refuse treatment.
• Staff treated young people with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood the individual needs of young people. They actively involved young people and families and carers in care decisions.
• Staff knew and understood the provider’s vision and values and how they were applied in the work of their team. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They reported that the provider promoted equality and diversity in its day-to-day work and in providing opportunities for career progression. They felt able to raise concerns without fear of retribution.

However:

• At the time of the inspection the hospital did not have a permanent registered manager as the previous registered manager had just left. A permanent manager had been appointed but had not yet started at the time of the inspection. The hospital also did not have a permanent hospital director although interim arrangements had been put into place to cover both posts.
• The young people had restricted access to an outdoor space in the hospital and due to the layout of the unit were not able to access the outdoor space freely and had to wait until staff were available, this had an impact on young people’s access to fresh air.
• Staff stated and records indicated they were not receiving any formal individual 1:1 supervision.
• There were a few areas where medicines management needed to improve, medication no longer being used was found not to be properly disposed of by the pharmacist, medication errors were found where incident reports had not been recorded. This was resolved at the time of the inspection.

Updated 21 August 2019

Updated 20 April 2017