The Priory Hospital Southampton

Updated 4 July 2023

This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection of the Priory Hospital Southampton. We inspected this hospital to ensure that it had made improvements identified during our inspection in August 2022.

The Priory Hospital Southampton has three wards. Sandpiper and Starling wards provide care and treatment for patients experiencing an acute episode of mental illness. Sandpiper ward can accommodate up to 17 patients. Starling ward is smaller, with 12 bedrooms. Skylark ward provides care and treatment for up to 11 patients with eating disorders. All wards admitted both male and female patients.

The hospital provides the following regulated activities:

• Treatment of disease, disorder and injury
• Assessment and treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983

Following the last inspection in August 2022, we told the hospital it needed to make improvements to comply with Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This included improvements to ensure compliance with regulations relating to safe care and treatment, premises and equipment, good governance and staffing. During this inspection, we found that the hospital had made these improvements and was now compliant with these regulations.

The service has a registered manager.

What people who use the service say

Patients said that staff were kind and very supportive. They said staff treated them well and it was easy to talk to them. They felt reassured that staff spent time with all patients, getting to know them. Patients said staff were professional, they understood the triggers that caused patients to become agitated and always noticed any changes in patients’ moods.

Updated 4 July 2023

Our rating of this service improved. 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 conducted emergency scenario simulations to ensure that staff became accustomed to responding to unexpected events. 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 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 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• 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.
• The service managed beds well.
• The service was well led and the governance processes ensured that ward procedures ran smoothly.

However:

• The hospital used a high number of agency staff.
• Patients and staff raised concerns over the competency of new agency staff working on an eating disorder ward.
• Nurses did not complete the safety checks consistently on Skylark ward.
• Not all staff knew where both ligature cutters were located on Skylark ward. Not all staff knew where the potential ligature points were around the ward.

Updated 4 July 2023

Our rating of this service improved. We rated it as good because:

• The ward was well equipped, well furnished, well maintained and fit for purpose. The service had enough nursing and medical staff, who knew the patients and received basic training to keep patients safe from avoidable harm.
• 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 regular supervisions and appraisals. The ward staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team with the wider hospital teams.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood the individual needs of patients. They actively involved patients, relatives and carers in care and treatment decisions.
• Staff assessed the physical and mental health of all patients on admission. They developed individual care plans, which they reviewed regularly through multidisciplinary discussion and updated as needed. Care plans reflected the assessed needs, were personalised, holistic and recovery-oriented, and had direct views from patients.
• Staff provided a range of care and treatment interventions suitable for the patient group and consistent with national guidance on best practice. Patients had access to CBT-E, DBT, MANTRA and patients could access additional therapies, such as dramatherapy, body image therapy and developing identity therapy.
• Staff understood and discharged their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Patient records showed that staff assessed and recorded capacity clearly for patients who might have impaired mental capacity.
• The service managed beds well. This meant that a bed was available when needed and that patients were not moved between wards unless this was for their benefit. Staff worked closely with local authorities and community eating disorder teams.
• Leaders had the skills, knowledge and experience to perform their roles, had a good understanding of the services they managed, and were visible in the service and approachable for patients and staff. The service was well led and the governance processes ensured that ward procedures ran smoothly.

However:

• Patients and staff raised concerns over the competencies of new agency staff working on an eating disorder ward.
• Nurses did not complete the safety checks consistently on Skylark ward.
• Not all staff knew where both ligature cutters were located on the ward and not all staff knew where the potential ligature points were around the ward.

Updated 4 July 2023

Our rating of this service improved. 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 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 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• 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.
• The service managed beds well. The hospital had arrangements local NHS to ensure that admissions and discharges were managed well.
• The service was well-led. The governance processes ensured that ward procedures ran smoothly.

However:

• The hospital used a high number of agency staff.