Priory Hospital Arnold

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Patient care was coordinated, and staff involved worked well together and with patients. Patients were encouraged to be involved in their care, to include their preferences and where requested information around treatment plans and medications was made available. Staff provided person-centred care and completed robust care plans and assessments with patients. Staff encouraged and supported patients to provide feedback on their care and responded to feedback given. Staff were aware of cultural needs and managers had processes and systems in place to support patients with potential barriers. The provider worked well with patients and external partners when it came to planning for the future.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Patients told us they felt their care was coordinated and staff worked well with them. They were encouraged to be involved in their care and treatment plan and knew who they could approach to request information from if needed.

Staff told us robust care planning enabled them to deliver person-centred care. If patients consented, family members would also be involved in the development and review of patient treatment plans. Staff completed various nationally recognised tools and assessments when development treatment plans. Patients had access to information leaflets regarding medication and treatment plans if they required them.

We observed staff engaging with patients in a person-centred way, adjusting their approach according to the patient’s needs. Information was displayed around the ward informing patients of different treatment, care, and therapeutic options along with how to give feedback on care. All care and treatment plans we reviewed showed patient involvement.

Patients were involved in creating and reviewing their care plans in collaboration with medics, staff and family members (if the patient had consented to this). We saw records that showed patients had access to regular one to one time with a named nurse or key worker.

Patients told us they felt their care was well coordinated. They were encouraged to be involved in the development of their care and treatment. If they consented their family members could also be involved.

Staff told us they encouraged the family members and relevant partners to attend the patient ward rounds with the consent of the patient. They always aimed to be inclusive and person-centred valuing the person, their opinions, and cultural needs. Effective evidence-based care and treatment along with the sharing of accurate information ensured continuity of care for the patient.

The service supported regular care program approach meetings and ward round meetings. Partners told us patients had access to a variety of services and professional including occupational therapists who assisted patients with a range of skills including activities of daily living. Advocacy team members told us patients were always encouraged to attend ward rounds and they were also welcomed to these if the patient had requested the additional support. The patients were always listened to and were always an active art of the treatment conversation at review meetings.

The service had processes in place to help involve internal and external professionals to ensure patients received continuity in care. All ward rounds were attended by a multi-disciplinary team and care program approach meetings included services that may be required at discharge including housing teams and community mental health teams.

Patients knew how to request information regarding their care and treatment. Leaflets were available regarding their medication, if needed.

Staff told us needs of the patients were continually assessed. Numerous resources including leaflets and interpreter services were available to ensure the patients understood their treatment and medication plans. Patients were able to attend ward round meetings and speak to staff at their 1 to 1 meeting where they could discuss their treatment plans and preferences in detail.

Upon admission patients received a welcome pack consisting of information about the ward and the care provided at the service. We saw information boards around the ward area displaying information about patient rights, advocacy services, interpreter services and how to give feedback on care.

Patients felt involved in their care and were listened to when they voiced their preferences and asked questions about their treatment or medication. Patients knew how to feedback on their care and the service. They attended weekly ward community meetings and had access to an independent advocate.

Patients had regular 1 to 1 time where they could raise concerns, voice their preferences or ask questions about their treatment. Information about feedback on care and the complaints process were displayed on patient information boards. Patients were able to speak with the nurse in charge or the ward manager if they requested. Any feedback or complaints were investigated with the patient or the person raising the concern receiving an outcome as quickly as possible.

Staff were visible and available for patients to speak to as and when needed. Staff were observed engaging with patients. Information was on display around how to raise a concern or make a complaint.

The service had received 3 complaints in the last 3 months. Managers had clear processes in place to show when complaints had been received and when they should be responded by.

Patients had access to a range of professionals including a dietician, psychologist, speech and language therapists, and occupational therapist. Each was able to work with patient individually to help deliver holistic treatment.

Staff worked as part of a multi-disciplinary team including medics and occupational therapist and psychologist. They supported patients with specific religious and cultural needs. They could access interpreters if required and there were accessible rooms available for those who used a wheelchair.

Partners told us patients had access to a range of professional input including a dietician, occupational therapist, and psychologist. The provider ensured patients had appropriate support and access to services upon discharge and included community teams in the care progress and ward round meetings.

Staff had access to interpreters through an independent service. There were accessible rooms available for people who may require the use of a wheelchair.

Patients felt involved in their care and treatment. Their preferences in outcomes and planning for the future were considered at ward review and discharge meetings.

Patients were given information leaflets regarding their care and treatment and were supported to understand this information through 1 to 1 support and at ward rounds. Patients could also access an independent advocate who was based at the service 3 days a week. All information could be made available in different formats included in different languages if requested. Staff told us they attended culture of care events and completed mandatory training around bias and inclusion.

The service had various internal auditing processes in place including care planning, reducing restrictive practice and environmental audits to ensure patient outcomes were being met. In addition, the provider conducted regular internal audits of the service completed by the provider quality improvement lead and specialist director.

Patients told us they were involved in planning for the future whether this meant discharge to home or transferring to another care provider more suited to their presenting needs.

Staff told us processes were in place to ensure all relevant individuals were involved in planning and preparing for patient discharges. This included community teams, housing teams and family members if the patient was being discharged back home. The medical team and staff would ensure all individuals involved in the patients care had access to discharge information and a detailed plan was developed with the patient and partners. This ensured patient choices and preferences were always accounted for within discharge plans.

Patients were involved in discharge planning in collaboration with external stakeholders including housing teams and family members where appropriate. We saw patient choice was included with care and discharge planning.