Thorpe Park Medical Centre

We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in most key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. Medicines, infection risk and safety incidents were well managed. The service had a robust process for safety incidents and lessons learned were embedded in practice
• Staff provided good care and treatment and gave patients 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 useful information. They followed the two-stage consent process
• 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 and carers
• The service planned care to meet 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 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 to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually

However:

• Staff completed and updated risk assessments for patients and removed or minimised risks. However, we observed that some patients risk assessments were either not completed or were not fully completed
• The surgical hand wash sink in the treatment room was not in line with best practice guidance
• Staff kept records of patients care and treatment. Records did not evidence a complete and contemporaneous record in respect of each patient. We found shortfalls in some records as not all records included a complete patient pathway
• Clearly documented care and discharge plans were not present in all patients records
• Sepsis management training was not available for clinical staff
• Baseline physiological observation checks of patients were not completed which meant there was no baseline to refer to should the patient deteriorate
• An anaphylaxis risk assessment for clinical areas was not completed for those areas which did not have anaphylaxis kits