The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

DaVita (UK) Ltd - Skegness

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

5 Ida Road, Skegness, Lincolnshire, PE25 2AR

Provided and run by:
DaVita (UK) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

26 May 2023

During a routine inspection

We had previously inspected but not 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 and trained to perform well on their roles. 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 to suit patients' needs.
  • 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:

  • The service did not always follow aseptic non touch techniques in all patient connection and disconnection activities.
  • There were some gaps in daily checks of emergency equipment and medicine fridge temperatures.
  • Several of the provider’s policies were out of date and still linked to the previous provider, demonstrating they had not been reviewed for at least 3 years.

03 May 2017 IMS

During a routine inspection

Renal Services (UK) Ltd - Skegness is managed by Renal Services (UK) Ltd and was established in its current location in May 2011. Previously based in Ingoldmells Lincolnshire the service had outgrown the facilities available at that site.

Renal dialysis was provided on a satellite basis through a service level agreement (SLA) with University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust under the clinical supervision of -consultant -nephrologists based at the trust. The unit was nurse led with the patients being assessed for suitability for treatment in a satellite unit by their consultant nephrologist prior to being referred to the unit. All patients receiving renal services at Skegness were NHS funded patients.

There are ten dialysis chairs at the Skegness site offering three - four hourly sessions on three days per week Monday, Wednesday and Friday providing a total regular capacity of 90 dialysis sessions per week. In addition, the unit accepts ‘away from base’ patients who may be visiting or taking a holiday in the area.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced part of the inspection on 03 May 2017 followed by an unannounced visit on 18 May 2017.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005

Services we do not rate

We regulate dialysis services but we do not currently have a legal duty to rate them. We highlight good practice and issues that service providers need to improve and take regulatory action as necessary.

We found the following areas of good practice:

  • Skegness dialysis unit had a positive working relationship with the commissioning trust.

  • Treatment and care provided was considered safe and patient focussed.

  • Patients were routinely asked their name and date of birth prior to dialysis interventions and administration of medication.

  • The unit had a qualified non-medical prescriber, ensuring medication changes were carried out in a timely manner.

  • Staffing levels were appropriate to meet the needs of patients. There were no vacancies at the time of the inspection and sickness levels where exceptionally low.

  • All staff had equal opportunities for professional and personal development.

  • A clinical nurse specialist was implementing reflective practice and action learning across all Renal Services (UK) Ltd promoting shared learning and development.

  • Managers provided active support to all staff, were visible and highly respected.

  • The service provided care based on current best practice guidelines.

  • The unit was promoting sepsis awareness.

  • The unit was flexible, meeting patients need for altered dialysis times, whenever possible.

  • The unit provided holiday dialysis and had patients return year on year to receive their treatment. Feedback from visiting patients was consistently positive.

  • The unit ensured there was always spare equipment, in case of failure, amounting to 20%.

  • The unit and patients had a positive experience of the locally commissioned taxi service.

  • All the taxi drivers received first aid training, carried a first aid box and had emergency contact numbers.

  • The unit was actively involved in a ‘sox off’ programme. Promoting foot health in diabetic patients.

  • Patient and staff feedback was consistently positive.

However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needed to improve:

  • The service should include a clear description of duty of candour within the incident reporting / being open policy. This was completed prior to our unannounced inspection.

  • The nominated safeguarding lead should access safeguarding training at level three.

  • The service should consider publishing collected workforce relations equality standards data.

Name of signatory

Heidi Smoult

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals

28, 31 January 2014

During a routine inspection

Patients told us they had signed consent forms for their treatment. They told us staff always asked their permission prior to the treatment commencing or care being given. One person said, "They (staff) explain everything to me." Consent forms were seen in the care plans.

Care plans reflected the current needs of patients. Patients told us they had been involved in the assessment process and in telling staff what their current needs were. They told us they knew staff kept daily notes on them. The care plans included details of when other health and social care professionals had been involved in each patients' care.

All equipment had been maintained and staff told us there was sufficient for the use of the current patients visiting the unit. Patients told us they were aware why staff were required to wear protective clothing and were not offended by that. One patient said, "They (staff) have a job to do."

Patients told us there were sufficient staff available to meet their needs. Staff told us they worked as a team and were involved in discussions about staffing levels.