Clifton Park Hospital Limited

Updated 9 May 2022

Clifton Park hospital is an independent hospital owned by Ramsay Health Care that is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury.
• Surgical procedures.
• Diagnostic and screening procedures.

The hospital has a manager registered with CQC.

The hospital provided a range of elective surgery treatments for NHS and other funded (insured and self-pay) adults in orthopaedics and cosmetic surgery specialties.

In October 2018 Clifton Park Hospital engaged in a partnership with North Yorkshire Orthopaedic Surgeons to form a new registered company – Clifton Park Hospital Ltd. As part of this, outpatient clinics are run from a separate dedicated outpatients building which is in close proximity to Clifton Park Hospital which contained 11 consulting rooms, two treatment rooms and x-ray facilities.

The surgery service had an in-patient ward with 24 inpatient beds, across both single and double rooms. There was also a dedicated pre-assessment clinic. There was an ambulatory day care unit, and two operating theatres and a dedicated recovery area. The hospital also has access to on-site physiotherapy a mobile MRI scanner and a mobile CT scanner.

Our inspection was unannounced (staff did not know we were coming). This was the first time we had inspected this service.

Updated 9 May 2022

We rated it as good because:

• The patient’s environments were safe, clean and well maintained.
  
• The service implemented robust process with respect to safeguarding.
  
• The service always had enough staff. Managers ensured that these staff received training, and appraisal. The staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team.
  
• Care plans were individualised and included discharge plans.
  
• Staff planned patient discharge well and liaised with services that would provide aftercare. Patients lengths of stay were short.
  
• Staff engaged in clinical audit to evaluate the quality of care they provided.
  
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood their individual needs. They involved patients and families and carers in care decisions.
  
• The service was well led, and the governance processes ensured that procedures ran smoothly.

However:

• Gaps were noted in the radiology risk assessments. We saw that the action by whom, action by what date, sign when complete fields were not always completed.
• Monitoring of spill kits checks was not documented in the outpatient’s area.
• It was not clearly identified that anaphylaxis audits had taken place as they were not identified on the resuscitation trolley audit documentation. The February 2022 resuscitation trolley checklist initially provided as evidence did not specify the areas or locations in which the resuscitation trolleys were located and / or checked. We noted on the resuscitation checklist provided post inspection that anaphylaxis kit checks were documented and had taken place. However, the checklist did not specify the actual location of which resuscitation trolley was checked.
• Signage and directions to the outpatient department location were not always clear.

The main service provided by this hospital was surgery. Where our findings on surgery– for example, management arrangements – also apply to other services, we do not repeat the information but cross-refer to the surgery service.

Updated 9 May 2022

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 collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care to patients and monitored their pain. 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 a diagnostic procedure.
• 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:

• Gaps were noted in the radiology risk assessments reviewed as the action by whom, action by what date, sign when complete fields were empty.
• Monitoring of spill kits checks was not documented in the outpatient’s area.
• It was not clearly identified within the radiology department that anaphylaxis audits had taken place as they were not identified on the resuscitation trolley audit documentation.
  
  Diagnostic and screening services are a small proportion of hospital activity. The main service was surgery. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the surgery section.
  
  We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

Updated 9 May 2022

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.
• Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well.
• The service managed safety incidents well, learned lessons from them and demonstrated changes to practice as a result.
• Staff provided good care and treatment.
• 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.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity and took account of their individual needs.
• 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 felt respected, supported and valued. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services.

Outpatients is a small proportion of hospital activity. The main service was surgery. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the surgery section.

We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

Updated 9 May 2022

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.
  
  We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.