How each of QA Hospital’s departments rated in latest inspection

0
Have your say

During an inspection in April, health watchdog the Care Quality Commission (CQC) looked at nine different departments at Queen Alexandra Hospital.

Each department was given an overall rating plus five individual ratings for if their services were safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

Queen Alexandra Hospital has been inspected by the health watchdog. Picture: Shaun Roster

Queen Alexandra Hospital has been inspected by the health watchdog. Picture: Shaun Roster

The ratings available are outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Read More: QA inspection finds staff have hope for future as boss vows to make further improvements

Read More: Health watchdog will work with hospital to make improvements 

Urgent and Emergency Services

Overall: Requires improvement

Safe: Requires improvement

Effective: Requires improvement

Caring: Requires improvement

Responsive: Inadequate

Well-led: Requires improvement

Key Findings:

- Emergency department was frequently crowded and patients spent too much time there.

- Inspectors witnessed a nurse shout at a patient and treat them in a disrespectful way

But…

- Staff in ED felt well supported by the rest of the hospital.

- Staff, teams and services worked well to deliver effective care and treatment.

Medical Care

Overall: Requires improvement

Safe: Requires improvement

Effective: Requires improvement

Caring: Requires improvement

Responsive: Requires improvement

Well-led: Requires improvement

Key Findings:

- Patient records were not held securely and had missing information.

- Staff shortages increased the risk of patients receiving unsafe or inadequate care.

But…

- There were good examples of multidisciplinary work.

- Staff cared for patients with compassion.

Surgery

Overall: Requires improvement

Safe: Requires improvement

Effective: Requires improvement

Caring: Good

Responsive: Good

Well-led: Requires improvement

Key Findings:

- Poor practice of infection prevention, assessing and responding to patient risk.

- The service did not have enough nursing staff in surgery.

But…

- Staff involved patients and those close to them in decisions about their care and treatment.

- The trust planned and provided services to meet the needs of local people.

Critical Care

Overall: Outstanding 

Safe: Outstanding 

Effective: Outstanding 

Caring: Outstanding 

Responsive: Outstanding 

Well-led: Outstanding 

Key Findings:

- People received excellent care, treatment and support which achieved good outcomes.

- Patients were truly respected and valued as individuals.

- Innovation was encouraged to achieve sustained improvements in safety and reductions in harm.

But…

- There was no dedicated critical care psychologist.

Maternity

Overall: Requires improvement 

Safe: Requires improvement 

Effective: Requires improvement 

Caring: Good 

Responsive: Requires improvement

Well-led: Requires improvement

Key Findings:

- Lack of assurance staff were competent with the use of equipment.

- Women could not always give birth in the place of their choosing.

But…

- Staff demonstrated care and compassion when caring for women.

- Women could access service when needed and there was 24/7 telephone guidance available.

Services for children and young people

Overall: Good

Safe: Requires improvement 

Effective: Good 

Caring: Oustanding 

Responsive: Good

Well-led: Good

Key Findings:

- Access and flow through all departments was very good.

- All children and their carers were happy with the care and support provided by staff.

- Managers prompted a positive culture that supported and valued staff.

But…

- Not enough nursing staff on the neonatal unit and medical staff on the children’s unit with the right skill mix. 

End of Life Care

Overall: Good

Safe: Good

Effective: Good 

Caring: Good 

Responsive: Good

Well-led: Good

Key Findings:

- Managers investigated incidents and shared lessons learned with the whole team and wider service

- Staff assessed and monitored patients regularly to see if they were in pain.

- Staff provided emotional support to patients to minimise their distress.

But…

- Inconsistencies in the use of the Mental Capacity Act.

Outpatients

Overall: Good

Safe: Good

Effective: N/A 

Caring: Good 

Responsive: Good

Well-led: Requires improvement.

Key Findings:

- The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills and training.

- The trust planned and provided services to meet needs of local people.

- The service engaged well with patients, staff and the public.

But…

- Some waiting areas were cramped.

Diagnostic Imaging

Overall: Good

Safe: Good

Effective: Good

Caring: Good 

Responsive: Good

Well-led: Good

Key Findings:

- Staff had completed training to allow them to undertake their role effectively.

- Patients received care from staff who treated them as individuals.

- The service was committed to improving services by learning.

But…

- Investigations into complaints did not take place in a timely way leading to delays.