Nightingale Hospital

Patients said that staff supported them with their physical, mental, emotional, and social needs. They were clear that they were asked about their needs and preferences and able to contribute to their risk assessments and care plans. Patients and their carers/relatives (when patients agreed) were involved in planning and making shared decisions about their care and treatment at ward rounds and other meetings. The service made reasonable adjustments where necessary to meet people’s needs such as mobility issues or language barriers. Meals reflected individual dietary, cultural and religious needs. The ward’s weekly timetable was available for patients to see on the ward including mealtimes and a range of group therapies and educational sessions from Monday to Friday, and some weekend sessions. Groups included goal setting, self-compassion, body image, nutrition, creative writing, arts and crafts, and meal planning. Patients also had sessions in compassion-focussed therapy, dramatherapy, art therapy, cognitive behavioural therapy, dialectical behavioural therapy, meditation, yoga, and gentle stretching. At the time of the inspection, management had limited the total number of patients (inpatients and day patients) to 15, to ensure that the unit was able to provide safe and appropriate support to all. There was some flexibility in exclusion criteria for the ward, the lead psychiatrist said that they conducted a holistic assessment and would carefully consider whether it was appropriate to admit patients with a chronic physical illness or psychiatric risk. Staff were aware of the language needs, and any other accessibility needs of patients at the service in terms of understanding information and could request an interpreter when needed. At the time of the inspection patients and carers felt that the hospital looked into their complaints and made changes accordingly. However, prior to the inspection, a small number of patients and carers were not happy with how responsive the service was to their concerns. The service was accessible for patients with mobility needs or those with very low weight who used a wheelchair. Staff were aware of the need to respect patients’ pronouns, religious needs, and beliefs. Patients told us that they were supported to make informed choices about their future care including the option of day care as a step down from inpatient care prior to discharge. On discharge patients were provided with crisis plans jointly devised between patients and staff.