We are the regulator: Our job is to check whether hospitals, care homes and care services are meeting essential standards.

Transcription

1 Inspection Report We are the regulator: Our job is to check whether hospitals, care homes and care services are meeting essential standards. The Westbourne Centre 53 Church Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 3SJ Tel: Date of Inspection: 10 September 2013 Date of Publication: October 2013 We inspected the following standards as part of a routine inspection. This is what we found: Respecting and involving people who use services Care and welfare of people who use services Cleanliness and infection control Requirements relating to workers Complaints Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

2 Details about this location Registered Provider Registered Manager Overview of the service Type of service Regulated activities The Westbourne Centre & Birmingham Limited Mrs. Sarah Annette Rush The Westbourne Centre provides cosmetic, dental and opthalmic surgery and treatments. The majority of services are paid for privately by patients but some procedures are done under contract with the NHS. Consultations and treatments are undertaken on a day case basis as no overnight beds are provided at the clinic. Acute services without overnight beds / listed acute services with or without overnight beds Diagnostic and screening procedures Surgical procedures Treatment of disease, disorder or injury Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

3 Contents When you read this report, you may find it useful to read the sections towards the back called 'About CQC inspections' and 'How we define our judgements'. Summary of this inspection: Page Why we carried out this inspection 4 How we carried out this inspection 4 What people told us and what we found 4 More information about the provider 4 Our judgements for each standard inspected: Respecting and involving people who use services 6 Care and welfare of people who use services 8 Cleanliness and infection control 10 Requirements relating to workers 12 Complaints 13 About CQC Inspections 14 How we define our judgements 15 Glossary of terms we use in this report 17 Contact us 19 Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

4 Summary of this inspection Why we carried out this inspection This was a routine inspection to check that essential standards of quality and safety referred to on the front page were being met. We sometimes describe this as a scheduled inspection. This was an unannounced inspection. How we carried out this inspection We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 10 September 2013, checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff, reviewed information given to us by the provider and talked with commissioners of services. What people told us and what we found During our visit we spoke with the registered manager, four members of staff and one of the ophthalmic consultants. We spoke with three people using the clinic and also spoke with five people on the telephone after our visit. People told us they were satisfied with their care and treatment. People told us that they were given sufficient information to enable them to make informed choices about their treatment before giving consent to it. They also told us that the staff were attentive and that they had been kept comfortable following surgery. Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff commenced work at the clinic. This ensured people were cared for by suitably qualified and experienced staff. We found there were good arrangements for infection control at the practice. These included the use of protective equipment and procedures for keeping the premises and the instruments clean. There were systems in place for recording and responding to complaints. Patients were provided with information so that they could feed back their views and opinions. You can see our judgements on the front page of this report. More information about the provider Please see our website for more information, including our most recent judgements against the essential standards. You can contact us using the telephone number on the back of the report if you have additional questions. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

5 There is a glossary at the back of this report which has definitions for words and phrases we use in the report. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

6 Our judgements for each standard inspected Respecting and involving people who use services People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care. Reasons for our judgement We spoke with a total of eight people who had consultations or treatment at the clinic. The people we spoke with were very positive about their experience and felt they had been treated with respect. One person told us, "They put me at my ease." Another person told us, "They are very understanding." People told us they were given enough information to help them make decisions about their care and had been informed of any risks associated with their treatment. We saw examples in people's medical records of discussions about proposed treatments that had taken place between the consultant and the person. People told us they were given time to ask questions during their appointments. One person at the clinic told us, "They took everything slowly, explained everything." Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. We found that people were given enough time to think about their consent decisions and encouraged to take the information away. No cosmetic surgery took place on the same day as the consultation. We looked at four people's records and they all contained a signed copy of the appropriate consent form. We saw both the practitioner and the person using the service had signed and dated the form. We saw that people were sent letters before their visit to the clinic. This included when to stop eating and drinking before a procedure and a contact number should they have any queries or concerns. This ensured people had known what to expect and were helped to manage some of the anxieties they might have. Arrangements were in place so that people's diversity, values and human rights were respected. Staff told us that they could access an interpreter service if a person who was unable to communicate in English was attending the clinic. The provider had considered the impact of the building on people with poor mobility. Ramps were available to gain access to the building and for people unable to access the dental surgeries on the first floor there was a dental surgery available on the ground floor. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

7 The clinic had one recovery room that was located near to the theatre. This could accommodate up to three people. The bays in this area were divided by curtains. We were told that surgery was usually organised so that patient lists were either all male or all female. This meant that the clinic could provide care to people in single sex areas and that males and females did not have to share the same toilet facilities. We were told the only exception to this was for ophthalmic surgery, when the patient lists may be both male and female as patients did not have to get undressed for this type of surgery. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

8 Care and welfare of people who use services People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. Reasons for our judgement We spoke with a total of eight people who had consultations or treatment at the clinic. People told us they were satisfied with their care and treatment. One person told us, "I would recommend the clinic to anyone, I have had exemplary treatment." Another person told us, "I felt in safe hands." People's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their plan. We looked at the records of four people who had treatment. Treatments requiring general anaesthesia were not performed at the clinic. We saw that people's medical history, general health and medication was discussed to ensure that there were no reasons why they should not have the treatment. One person told us that their consultant had a query with the medication they were prescribed and had contacted their GP for further details. Provision of this information supported the safe planning of care and treatment. Surgical safety checklists had been used in order to reduce the risk of complications arising as a result of surgical procedures. The provider may find it useful to note that although the checklists we sampled showed that the necessary safety checks had been completed some information was missing. However, where the checklist had missing information we found this information had been recorded elsewhere and evidenced that the checks had been completed. People told us that they had been kept comfortable following surgery. One person told us, "The recovery nurse was lovely and never left my side." Information was provided to people on discharge so that they knew how to support their recovery at home and what to do if they had any concerns. One person told us, "I got a lot of aftercare information and they also rang me in the evening after my procedure to check that I was okay." Arrangements were in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. All clinical staff that we spoke with advised us that they had received training in life support as part of their mandatory training. We saw equipment was available in the clinic to respond to medical emergencies, this included emergency medication and oxygen cylinders. Records showed Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

9 that checks of the emergency equipment was undertaken. The provider may find it useful to note that we found that for some masks and tubes they were a few days over their expiry date. This had been identified by staff and replacements were on order. We found that agreements were in place with two local hospitals for the transfer of patients in an emergency. The manager advised that there had not been any emergency transfers out of the clinic. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

10 Cleanliness and infection control People should be cared for in a clean environment and protected from the risk of infection Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. Reasons for our judgement We spoke with a total of eight people who had consultations or treatment at the clinic. All of the people we spoke with said they thought the clinic was kept clean. One person told us, "It's spotless." The areas of the clinic we visited were clean, hygienic and tidy. Alcohol hand gels were available throughout the clinic. The manager told us that following comments from people using the clinic it was intended to move the hand gels in the reception area to ensure they were more visible. There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. Key staff had specific responsibilities allocated to them regarding infection prevention and control. Infection prevention audits had also been undertaken in order to ensure satisfactory infection control procedures were maintained. We saw a number of policies and procedures that were in place for staff guidance that enhanced a good standard of cleanliness and infection control. Staff we spoke to during our visit told us that they had undertaken training regarding infection control training. People we spoke with indicated that staff followed good infection control procedures. People who received dental treatment confirmed that they were provided with glasses to protect their eyes during treatment and the dentist always wore protective clothing including gloves and masks whilst carrying out work. A person who had received ophthalmic treatment confirmed that the nurse had washed their hands before administering eye drops. We looked at the decontamination procedures for instruments used in the dental surgeries. A nurse showed us how she undertook the decontamination and sterilisation of instruments. There were designated 'clean' and 'dirty' rooms at the clinic in order to make sure that there was no cross contamination from used instruments. The nurse was able to explain the process in place for making sure that all instruments were thoroughly cleaned and sterilised between each use. They showed us how they rinsed and then sterilised used instruments using appropriate equipment. We checked a sample of bagged instruments and equipment in the theatre and in one of Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

11 the dental surgeries. All items were in date, sealed and stored appropriately. This minimised the risk of unsterile instruments being used on people who used the service. We found there were procedures in place for safe disposal of clinical waste, including a sharps bin to ensure effective infection control. We found that clinical waste was stored in a lockable area and that it was collected on a weekly basis to ensure that bins did not overflow. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

12 Requirements relating to workers People should be cared for by staff who are properly qualified and able to do their job Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Reasons for our judgement We spoke to people using the service but their feedback did not relate to this standard. At our previous visit we found that improvement was required to ensure that recruitment procedures were robust. At this inspection we found that improvement had taken place. Suitable references were now available for staff. Systems to check staff professional registrations had also improved and evidence of up to date registration was available in the staff files sampled. We found that criminal record bureau or disclosure and barring checks had been completed before staff started working with people. We found one instance where some information had been disclosed on a criminal record bureau check. The manager informed us this had been discussed at recruitment and risk assessed. The provider may find it useful to note that a record of the risk assessment was not available. We were informed by the manager that a record would be added to the personnel file. Consultants applying for practicing privileges at the clinic were required to undergo additional checks before they were approved. This included approval from the Medical Advisory Committee made up of consultants. The systems in place ensured people were cared for by consultants with suitable experience for the role. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

13 Complaints People should have their complaints listened to and acted on properly Our judgement The provider was meeting this standard. There was an effective complaints system available. Reasons for our judgement We spoke with a total of eight people who had consultations or treatment at the clinic. People we spoke with all told us that they had never had to make any complaints but would not hesitate to raise them if they had any. One person told us, "I would have the confidence to tell them and think they would put it right." People had their comments and concerns listened to and acted on. One person told us that they had raised a minor concern and that staff had acted immediately to address the issue. Staff told us that if people had any concerns they would always bring these to the attention of the manager. The manager explained they would always try to resolve people's concerns and complaints after talking with the person. The registered provider had a complaints policy in place which outlined the process for reporting and investigating complaints. A summary of the complaints process was available to people using the clinic. The provider may wish to note that the summary did not include details of other organisations who could be contacted, should the person remain dissatisfied with how the provider has responded to their complaint. We asked to look at the record of complaints made since our last inspection of the clinic. We found that one complaint had been received and this was still subject to investigation. The provider had responded to the initial complaint and a meeting had taken place with the person. We found that since our last inspection the provider had implemented a new computerised system to record complaints and incidents which will provide performance indicators for key themes. This will help to determine key areas for improvement in the future. Sytstems were in place to seek the views of people using the service and these were discussed at team meetings. Records showed that action was taken in response to people's comments to improve the service. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

14 About CQC inspections We are the regulator of health and social care in England. All providers of regulated health and social care services have a legal responsibility to make sure they are meeting essential standards of quality and safety. These are the standards everyone should be able to expect when they receive care. The essential standards are described in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 and the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations We regulate against these standards, which we sometimes describe as "government standards". We carry out unannounced inspections of all care homes, acute hospitals and domiciliary care services in England at least once a year to judge whether or not the essential standards are being met. We carry out inspections of other services less often. All of our inspections are unannounced unless there is a good reason to let the provider know we are coming. There are 16 essential standards that relate most directly to the quality and safety of care and these are grouped into five key areas. When we inspect we could check all or part of any of the 16 standards at any time depending on the individual circumstances of the service. Because of this we often check different standards at different times. When we inspect, we always visit and we do things like observe how people are cared for, and we talk to people who use the service, to their carers and to staff. We also review information we have gathered about the provider, check the service's records and check whether the right systems and processes are in place. We focus on whether or not the provider is meeting the standards and we are guided by whether people are experiencing the outcomes they should be able to expect when the standards are being met. By outcomes we mean the impact care has on the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service, and the experience they have whilst receiving it. Our inspectors judge if any action is required by the provider of the service to improve the standard of care being provided. Where providers are non-compliant with the regulations, we take enforcement action against them. If we require a service to take action, or if we take enforcement action, we re-inspect it before its next routine inspection was due. This could mean we re-inspect a service several times in one year. We also might decide to reinspect a service if new concerns emerge about it before the next routine inspection. In between inspections we continually monitor information we have about providers. The information comes from the public, the provider, other organisations, and from care workers. You can tell us about your experience of this provider on our website. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

15 How we define our judgements The following pages show our findings and regulatory judgement for each essential standard or part of the standard that we inspected. Our judgements are based on the ongoing review and analysis of the information gathered by CQC about this provider and the evidence collected during this inspection. We reach one of the following judgements for each essential standard inspected. This means that the standard was being met in that the provider was compliant with the regulation. If we find that standards were met, we take no regulatory action but we may make comments that may be useful to the provider and to the public about minor improvements that could be made. Action needed This means that the standard was not being met in that the provider was non-compliant with the regulation. We may have set a compliance action requiring the provider to produce a report setting out how and by when changes will be made to make sure they comply with the standard. We monitor the implementation of action plans in these reports and, if necessary, take further action. We may have identified a breach of a regulation which is more serious, and we will make sure action is taken. We will report on this when it is complete. Enforcement action taken If the breach of the regulation was more serious, or there have been several or continual breaches, we have a range of actions we take using the criminal and/or civil procedures in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and relevant regulations. These enforcement powers include issuing a warning notice; restricting or suspending the services a provider can offer, or the number of people it can care for; issuing fines and formal cautions; in extreme cases, cancelling a provider or managers registration or prosecuting a manager or provider. These enforcement powers are set out in law and mean that we can take swift, targeted action where services are failing people. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

16 How we define our judgements (continued) Where we find non-compliance with a regulation (or part of a regulation), we state which part of the regulation has been breached. Only where there is non compliance with one or more of Regulations 9-24 of the Regulated Activity Regulations, will our report include a judgement about the level of impact on people who use the service (and others, if appropriate to the regulation). This could be a minor, moderate or major impact. Minor impact - people who use the service experienced poor care that had an impact on their health, safety or welfare or there was a risk of this happening. The impact was not significant and the matter could be managed or resolved quickly. Moderate impact - people who use the service experienced poor care that had a significant effect on their health, safety or welfare or there was a risk of this happening. The matter may need to be resolved quickly. Major impact - people who use the service experienced poor care that had a serious current or long term impact on their health, safety and welfare, or there was a risk of this happening. The matter needs to be resolved quickly We decide the most appropriate action to take to ensure that the necessary changes are made. We always follow up to check whether action has been taken to meet the standards. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

17 Glossary of terms we use in this report Essential standard The essential standards of quality and safety are described in our Guidance about compliance: Essential standards of quality and safety. They consist of a significant number of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 and the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations These regulations describe the essential standards of quality and safety that people who use health and adult social care services have a right to expect. A full list of the standards can be found within the Guidance about compliance. The 16 essential standards are: Respecting and involving people who use services - Outcome 1 (Regulation 17) Consent to care and treatment - Outcome 2 (Regulation 18) Care and welfare of people who use services - Outcome 4 (Regulation 9) Meeting Nutritional Needs - Outcome 5 (Regulation 14) Cooperating with other providers - Outcome 6 (Regulation 24) Safeguarding people who use services from abuse - Outcome 7 (Regulation 11) Cleanliness and infection control - Outcome 8 (Regulation 12) Management of medicines - Outcome 9 (Regulation 13) Safety and suitability of premises - Outcome 10 (Regulation 15) Safety, availability and suitability of equipment - Outcome 11 (Regulation 16) Requirements relating to workers - Outcome 12 (Regulation 21) Staffing - Outcome 13 (Regulation 22) Supporting Staff - Outcome 14 (Regulation 23) Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision - Outcome 16 (Regulation 10) Complaints - Outcome 17 (Regulation 19) Records - Outcome 21 (Regulation 20) Regulated activity These are prescribed activities related to care and treatment that require registration with CQC. These are set out in legislation, and reflect the services provided. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

18 Glossary of terms we use in this report (continued) (Registered) Provider There are several legal terms relating to the providers of services. These include registered person, service provider and registered manager. The term 'provider' means anyone with a legal responsibility for ensuring that the requirements of the law are carried out. On our website we often refer to providers as a 'service'. Regulations We regulate against the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010 and the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations Responsive inspection This is carried out at any time in relation to identified concerns. Routine inspection This is planned and could occur at any time. We sometimes describe this as a scheduled inspection. Themed inspection This is targeted to look at specific standards, sectors or types of care. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October

19 Contact us Phone: Write to us at: Care Quality Commission Citygate Gallowgate Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4PA Website: Copyright Copyright (2011) Care Quality Commission (CQC). This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part, free of charge, in any format or medium provided that it is not used for commercial gain. This consent is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and on proviso that it is not used in a derogatory manner or misleading context. The material should be acknowledged as CQC copyright, with the title and date of publication of the document specified. Inspection Report The Westbourne Centre October