Cygnet Pindar House

Updated 16 August 2021

Cygnet Pindar House is a 22-bed neuropsychiatric rehabilitation facility for men affected by acquired brain injuries and those diagnosed with a progressive neurological disease, like Huntington’s Disease. The hospital has one ward over two floors. The hospital provides care for men between 18 and 65 with complex physical health needs and/or challenging behaviour. The hospital cares for informal patients as well as those detained under the Mental Health Act.

The hospital is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury
• Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act

The hospital has a manager registered with CQC.

Since Pindar House opened in February 2020, it has not been inspected. We therefore carried out a comprehensive inspection that covered all the key questions.

What people who use the service say

We spoke with two patients and five of their carers. We also looked at the notes from the patient community meeting. Patients and carers told us the hospital was clean, well maintained and nicely furnished. Both patients and four of the carers told us staff were kind, caring and respectful to patients and their families. The hospital had enough staff and patients felt safe on the ward. Patients could speak freely with ward staff, and managers and praised them for their patience and responsiveness. The food was good and patients had access to advocacy if they wanted it. Both patients and carers told us they felt involved in their treatment and could attend meetings about their care. However, one carer told us they did not think the hospital was doing a good job. We spoke with staff separately about the issues they raised.

Updated 16 August 2021

We have not inspected this service before. We rated it as good because:

• The service provided safe care. The ward environments were safe and clean. The wards had enough nurses and doctors. Staff assessed and managed risk well. They minimised the use of restrictive practices, managed medicines safely and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding.
• Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the patients cared for in a mental health rehabilitation ward and in line with national guidance about best practice. Staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided.
• The ward teams included or had access to the full range of specialists required to meet the needs of patients on the wards. Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal. The ward staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary 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.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood the individual needs of patients. They actively involved patients and families and carers in care decisions.
• Staff planned and managed discharge well and liaised well with services that would provide aftercare. As a result, discharge was rarely delayed for other than a clinical reason.
• The service worked to a model of mental health rehabilitation based on national standards. Managers at all levels in the hospital had the right skills and abilities to run a service providing high-quality sustainable care.

However:

• Managers could not provide assurance that all environmental risk assessments, patient care plan goal reviews and clinical records audits had been completed properly and in line with the provider’s policies.
• Patient activity timetables were general and not always tailored to individual need.
• The service did not always keep contemporaneous records. Information was recorded in several different places, in a mixture of electronic and paper records and staff did not always know where to record important health information. We also found one example of a procedure being carried out without the best interest decision being properly recorded.
• Staff did not have the knowledge necessary to provide information to appropriate carers on how to access a carer’s assessment.

Updated 16 August 2021