22 October to 28 November 2019
During a routine inspection
Our rating of services stayed the same. We rated it them as good because:
- The hospital 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 hospital controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The hospital 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 five 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 hospital planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback.
- Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the trust’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. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.
However
- We found areas of the theatre suite had not been maintained in order to reduce the risks to patients
- We observed patient records unattended in one ward area.
- Waiting times were not in line with national standards for some surgical specialities.
- The surgical service did not have a clear vision for what it wanted to achieve or a strategy to turn this into action. The vision and strategy were dependent on progress in regional developments within the wider health economy. Risk registers did not identify environmental risks we observed during inspection.