This is the first time we rated this service. We rated it as good because:
The service 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 service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
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 seven 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 service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’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:
Staff conducted Imaging referral checks, but these checks were not always recorded in a way which was clear or accurately represented when they were conducted or by which member of staff.
The imaging department located at 30 Devonshire Street reported to a separate leadership structure at another registered location provided by HCA International Limited. Some diagnostic imaging staff told us they did not understand why the department was structured the way it was, and they felt the department at 30 Devonshire Street was not part of the wider department
At the time of inspection, only the computerised tomography (CT) department was adapted to meet the needs of children. The recovery areas in the imaging department and outpatient were not child friendly, along with the treatment rooms and other diagnostic rooms. Senior staff told us this was due to the planned refurbishment of the location and these areas would be redesigned with children in mind, but this was not the case at the time of our inspection.
We found that there was no tamper evident seal on the anaphylaxis box kept in the resuscitation trolley used by the physiology team in the basement.
At the time of inspection, the paediatric service was not undertaking pain audits.
The service did not actively engage with children and young people and their parents.