Archived: SpaMedica Bradford

Updated 8 June 2022

SpaMedica Bradford is operated by SpaMedica Ltd. The service offers cataract surgery and yttrium-aluminium-garnet laser (YAG) capsulotomy services for NHS patients. YAG capsulotomy is a special laser treatment used to improve your vision after cataract surgery.

In the 12 months before our inspection between March 2021 and February 2022 the service had performed 3,807 operations.

The service’s clinical services are provided on the ground floor. The service has an operating suite with one theatre providing cataract surgery, pre- and post-operative assessment areas including a discharge lounge. The service did not treat children.

The service is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Diagnostic and screening procedures

• Surgical procedures

• Treatment of disease, disorder and injury

The service is managed by a registered manager supported by an ophthalmic team which consists of:

Ophthalmology consultants

Optometrists

Registered nurses

Healthcare technicians

Operating department staff

Administration staff

At the time of our inspection the registered manager was new in post having started on 4 April 2022. This is the first time we have inspected and rated this service. We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out an unannounced inspection on 31 March and 27 April 2022. To get to the heart of the patients’ experience we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people’s needs and well led.

The main service provided by this hospital was surgery.

Updated 8 June 2022

We had never inspected this service before. 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 and learned lessons from them.

• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to 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. They supported patients to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available six 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.

However;

• Staff did not always keep their mandatory training up-to-date. Managers did not always alert staff when they needed to update their training.

• Staff did not always adhere to best practice when wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). The service could not always dispose of clinical waste safely.

• Managers could not always keep the number of cancelled appointments to a minimum.

Updated 8 June 2022

We had not inspected this service before. 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 and learned lessons from them.

• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to 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. They supported patients to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available six 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.

However:

• Staff did not always keep their mandatory training up-to-date. At the time of our inspection 73% of service staff had completed their mandatory training overall which did not meet the provider’s 85% target. Staff sickness and new starters impacted on these results.

• Managers did not always alert staff when they needed to update their training. For example, 13 staff had not started their practical manual handling training and nine staff had not started their dementia champions training.

• Staff did not always adhere to best practice when wearing personal protective equipment (PPE). We observed one clinical and two non-clinical staff members wearing facemasks below their nose.

• Clinical staff did not always introduce themselves fully or clearly explain their role. We observed one junior optometrist at pre-assessment only introducing themselves to a patient by name without giving their role or wider context. This meant less verbal or cognitive patients could be potentially confused or unclear about their care and treatment options.

• The service could not always dispose of clinical waste safely. They had some periods of non-collection leading to overflowing of general and clinical waste bins.

• At the time of our inspection the service’s total turnover rate was 26%. This was above the provider target of 21% or less for 2022. Ten staff had left the service within the last year, six of which were clinical and two optometrists.

• Managers could not always keep the number of cancelled appointments to a minimum due to staffing shortages. In the six months from September 2021 to February 2022 the service cancelled a total of 53 patient appointments after admission. 25 of these were for clinical reasons, 24 were by the provider and four were by patients.