Keats House

Updated 5 August 2021

Keats House is an independent, community mental health service delivered by a single consultant psychiatrist. The service provides support to adult patients with general psychiatric disorders including anxiety and depression. The service is provided by The Althea Practice and is registered to deliver the following regulated activity; ‘Treatment of disease, disorder or injury’.

The consultant psychiatrist sees private patients referred to the service by their GP, employer or via self-referrals. The service is not funded by the NHS. The practice is based in a building managed by an external landlord where other independent doctors also practice. During the pandemic, the service switched to a remote, online-delivery model and at the time of this inspection were not seeing patients face to face.

The consultant psychiatrist is supported by a small team of non-medical staff. This includes the practice manager who is also the registered manager, personal assistant, administrator and a financial assistant. The service has two appointed directors one of whom is the consultant psychiatrist.

We had not yet inspected the service. We had visited the service under its previous registration in July 2017. At that time, we did not rate this service type. We did highlight some areas for improvement which the service had acted upon.

What people who use the service say

We interviewed eight patients and reviewed other sources of patient feedback. This included three pieces of written feedback sent to us by patients who were unable to attend an interview, patient surveys and feedback that had been published by patients in the public domain.

Feedback we received from patients was consistently positive. Patients said care and support they received had exceeded their expectations and many described the service as ‘outstanding’. All patients commended the person-centred approach of the entire staff team.

Many remarked on how well the staff team had adapted and had continued to provide an ‘excellent’ service despite recent challenges it had faced, including the COVID-19 pandemic.

Updated 5 August 2021

We rated the location as good overall because:

• The service provided safe care. The premises where patients would usually be seen face to face were safe and clean. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the service was being delivered virtually at the time of our inspection. The provider had taken steps to ensure this way of working was carried out safely.
• The number of patients on the consultant psychiatrist’s caseload was well managed. Waiting lists were monitored to ensure that patients were seen promptly when needed. Risks to patients were assessed and managed well, and all staff followed good practice with respect to safeguarding.
• The consultant psychiatrist delivered a holistic, recovery-oriented service. Treatment plans were informed by comprehensive assessments and made in collaboration with patients and their families, when appropriate. The service provided a blended approach, between psychological and pharmacological treatment options. These options were based on best-practice guidance and met patients’ needs. The consultant psychiatrist evaluated and reflected on the quality of care provided to ensure it was delivered to a high standard.
• The consultant psychiatrist worked alongside the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of the patients. All staff within the service received training, supervision and appraisal. Staff worked well together as a team and with relevant services outside the organisation.
• The consultant psychiatrist understood their role and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• A truly person-centred approach was embedded into every aspect of the service. Staff went above and beyond to uphold patient’s privacy and dignity and provide emotional support when they needed it. Patients, families and carers were actively involved in care decisions and spoke very highly of the service. As patients accessed the service based on their individual preference, there was a strong focus on achieving patient satisfaction, whilst following the service’s well-defined, scope of practice.
• The service was easy to access and patients who required access to the service more urgently were seen promptly. Patients did not wait too long to start treatment if their referral was accepted. The acceptance criteria for new referrals to the service was well defined to ensure the service only accepted patients whose needs it could meet safely.
• The service was well led. Governance processes and procedures were in place to ensure that the service ran smoothly. Leaders were committed to creating a positive working environment for the staff team.

Updated 5 August 2021