We carried out a review of the data available to us about Vascular Studies Room on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Vascular Studies Room, you can give feedback on this service.
Vascular Studies Room is operated by Independent Vascular Studies Limited. The service opened in May 1999 and delivers vascular investigations to NHS trusts and independent hospitals. There are eight locations across the North West of England.
This service is based in a dedicated area of a local hospital. The service has two scanning rooms and a waiting room, one of the scanning rooms also included an office area.
The service carried out 5,245 scans in the period April 2018 to March 2019.
We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the short announced part of the inspection on 6 August 2019.
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 rate
We had not rated this service before. We rated it as Good overall.
Staff received and kept up-to-date with their mandatory training.
Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and the service worked well with other agencies to do so. Staff had training on how to recognise and report abuse, and they knew how to apply it.
The service controlled infection risk well. Staff used equipment and control measures to protect patients, themselves and others from infection. They kept equipment and the premises visibly clean.
The design, maintenance and use of facilities, premises and equipment kept people safe. Staff were trained to use them. Staff managed clinical waste well.
Staff knew about and dealt with any specific risk issues.
The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to provide the right care and treatment.
Staff kept detailed records of patients’ care and treatment. Records were clear, up-to-date, stored securely and easily available to all staff providing care.
The service managed patient safety incidents well. Staff recognised incidents and near misses and reported them appropriately. Managers investigated incidents and shared lessons learned with the whole team and the wider service. When things went wrong, staff apologised and gave patients honest information and suitable support. Managers ensured that actions from patient safety alerts were implemented and monitored.
The service provided care and treatment based on national guidance and evidence-based practice. Managers checked to make sure staff followed guidance.
Staff monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment. They used the findings to make improvements and achieved good outcomes for patients.
Staff were experienced, qualified and had the right skills and knowledge to meet the needs of patients.
Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and took account of their individual needs.
Staff gave patients and those close to them help, emotional support and advice when they needed it.
Staff made sure patients and those close to them understood their care and treatment.
Managers planned and organised services, so they met the changing needs of the local population.
The service was inclusive and took account of patients’ individual needs and preferences. Staff made reasonable adjustments to help patients access services. They coordinated care with other services and providers.
People could access the service when they needed it and received the right care promptly. Waiting times from referral to treatment and arrangements to admit, treat and discharge patients were better than national standards.
Staff understood the policy on complaints and knew how to handle them.
Leaders had the skills and abilities to run the service. They understood and managed the priorities and issues the service faced. They were visible and approachable in the service for patients and staff. They supported staff to develop their skills and take on more senior roles.
The service had a vision for what it wanted to achieve and a strategy to turn it into action.
Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.
Leaders operated effective governance processes, throughout the service and with partner organisations. Staff at all levels were clear about their roles and accountabilities and had regular opportunities to meet, discuss and learn from the performance of the service.
Leaders and teams used systems to manage performance effectively.
The service collected reliable data and analysed it. Staff could find the data they needed, in easily accessible formats, to understand performance, make decisions and improvements. The information systems were integrated and secure.
Leaders and staff actively and openly engaged with patients and staff.
All staff were committed to continually learning and improving services. They had a good understanding of quality improvement methods and the skills to use them. Leaders encouraged innovation and participation in research.
However
The service’s complaints policy did not set out the process for how self-funded patients could complain.
Ann Ford
Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (North)
During this inspection we found a waiting room had been created specifically for patients using the service. Patients had been provided with information prior to their appointment about the procedure they were to undergo. They had also been provided with directions how to find the service. We found the service had a good range of information leaflets in the waiting area.
We observed one patient reading leaflet's about the service whilst waiting for their appointment. They told us they were happy with the new waiting area and showed us the information in their appointment letter. The patient said, 'I am happy with the information provided in my appointment letter. I was provided with clear directions how to find the department. They informed me what my scan was for and what to expect'.
We looked at staff training records, staff supervision arrangements and the services arrangements for record keeping. We did this because we wanted to identify that appropriate arrangements were in place to support staff members. We also wanted to ensure patients medical records were held safely and remained confidential.
One patient we spoke with told us their GP had arranged the appointment and they didn't know what the procedure involved, but they were not too concerned by this.
We saw that no patient literature was provided in waiting or treatment areas. There was no information to explain to patients was an ultrasound scan was or what it involved.
Patients told us that they found it difficult to find the service within the hospital and that they had found it difficult to find suitable parking near by. Staff told us there were plans to send out a map of the hospital with future patient appointment letters. One patient told us they would have found a map, 'really useful.'
We heard and observed staff talking to patients in a respectful way.
We spoke to one patient following their scan and they told us, 'It was not a bad experience.'
Another patient told us that staff had explained the scan procedure to them and because of this they full understood what was happening to them.