Broomhill

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Staff attended to patients needs in a timely way wherever possible. Staff told us that as patient numbers had reduced, they had more time for the patients and most of the time could meet their needs immediately. Patients agreed with this. Patients told us most staff treated them with kindness and compassion. Staff respected patient’s privacy and dignity. We saw staff knock on bedroom doors before entering. Staff took patient’s wishes into account when planning care and treatment. Staff offered patients choices on a day to day basis whenever possible. Staff ensured that all patients were aware of their rights, whether they were informal or detained under the Mental Health Act (1983). People were encouraged to keep in touch with others who were important to them. If patients were unable to access leave, staff arranged visits alongside regular contact through telephone and video calls.

This service scored 55 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Most patient told us that staff treated them with kindness and compassion. One patient said that only some of the staff were understanding and treated them with compassion. However, no examples were given. Patients said that staff assisted and supported them when they needed help. All patients said staff were mindful of preserving their privacy and dignity.

Most staff said that relationships with colleagues were respectful. One staff member relayed a negative experience with another staff member but had escalated this appropriately. Staff said they welcomed any external visitors, whether this be friends or relatives of patients, or other healthcare professionals. All staff said that a patients privacy and dignity is really important to consider, and would be respected where possible.

Feedback we received from partners was positive. External vising professionals said that staff always offered a warm welcome via the reception and would accommodate them if they needed a private room to see patients. Staff were reported to be polite and helpful, assisting them with any queries as best they could.

We observed numerous kind interactions between staff and patients. Staff spoke respectfully and tried to accommodate any requests at the earliest opportunity. We saw staff knock on patients’ bedrooms before entering to maintain privacy and dignity. Staff communicated with patients in a way they could understand. Information was secured securely and kept confidential as we would expect.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

Patients we spoke with said they did have some control on a day-to-day basis around making decisions regarding their care and treatment. Care and treatment plans were discussed during the multi-disciplinary meetings. Patients also said that staff encouraged them to maintain relationships with people who were important to them outside of the hospital. Patients were aware of activities on offer. One patient said they were not sure how this helped them on a therapeutic level, but it helped to relieve boredom.

Staff described patients as being able to make decisions daily, such as what time to get up, whether to attend any activities, what to have at mealtimes and whether or not to accept prescribed medicines. Nursing staff said they always explain patients’ rights to them, whether informal or detained under the Mental Health Act (1983). Staff recorded this within day-to-day clinical records. Staff also told us about the independent advocacy service which patients had access to on a weekly basis.

We observed staff giving patients the opportunity to attend an activity or to utilise their leave. We saw that patients chose what they wanted to eat at each mealtime. The hospital had leaflets available which explained a person’s rights if detained under the Mental Health Act (1983). There was various information around the hospital about how to make a complaint, how to contact CQC and how to access advocacy.

Most patients we spoke with said staff responded to their needs in a timely way. One patient said that if staff were busy there could be a delay, the example given was escorted leave. Patient said staff responded to them appropriately and explained if they could not immediately assist why this was.

Staff told us that as patient numbers had been reduced, they were able to meet patients’ needs more quickly and be more visible to patients. Several staff said this had not always been possible when they had a higher number of patients, as they could be very busy, or have to attend to an incident, for example, which could cause some delays with patient requests. Staff did say they responded at the earliest opportunity, and generally, although there may be a slight delay, staff attended to the patients as soon as they were free.

During the onsite assessment, we observed staff respond to patients respectfully and in a timely way. Staff were visible in communal areas and were not sat in the nursing office, so patients could easily locate them as and when needed.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.