Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


4Dbabyface, Newport.

4Dbabyface in Newport is a Diagnosis/screening specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults under 65 yrs, caring for children (0 - 18yrs) and diagnostic and screening procedures. The last inspection date here was 29th April 2019

4Dbabyface is managed by Perry & Williamson Limited who are also responsible for 1 other location

Contact Details:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Requires Improvement
Effective: No Rating / Under Appeal / Rating Suspended
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Requires Improvement
Overall:

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-04-29
    Last Published 2019-04-29

Local Authority:

    Telford and Wrekin

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

11th December 2018 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

4Dbabyface is operated by Perry & Williamson Limited. Facilities include one consultation room and one reception area.

The service comes under the diagnostic imaging core service but they undertake baby keepsakes as the sole activity which are not diagnostic.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We undertook an unannounced inspection on 11 December 2018. ‘To get to the heart of women’s 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 rated it as Requires improvement overall.

We found areas of practice that required improvement:

  • The service did not have a system to track what mandatory training staff had completed.

  • The service did not have someone with level three safeguarding training.

  • The service did not have all the required policies in place.

  • The service did not have a written process for staff to follow if a woman or visitor deteriorated.

  • Staff did not receive documented yearly appraisals.

  • The service did not offer Mental Capacity Act training.

  • The service did not have any non-English information leaflets or access to a translation service.

  • The service had not updated its fire risk assessment.

  • The service did not undertake any audits.

  • The registered manager did not have information governance training.

We found good practice:

  • The service had appropriate staffing levels in place for the amount of women they scanned. The sonographer had the appropriate mandatory training in place.

  • The service had suitable premises and equipment and looked after them well. Staff kept themselves, the premises and equipment clean.

  • The different kinds of staff within the service worked together as a team to benefit women.

  • A Staff at the service treated women with kindness and compassion. Staff provided support for women in times of emotional distress.

  • The service planned and provided services in a way that met the needs of women and they could access the service when they wanted to.

  • The service engaged well with women, staff, the public to plan and manage its service.

  • The registered manager promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on shared values. Staff told us the manager was always approachable with any issues.

21st May 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We met with four people who had received a service on the day of our inspection. They told us that they had all been very happy with their experience. They spoke positively about the information that they received and the professionalism of the sonographer (the person who carried out the scan). People told us that they felt involved in the process. They said that they were able to ask questions, all of which were answered fully. They told us that their dignity and confidentiality had been maintained at all times. Staff told us how the achieved this.

Staff told us how they responded sensitively to people when they had not had the outcome that they wanted. They also told us how they worked with health care professionals when people needed further consultation.

The environment was clean and hygienic. All appropriate checks had been carried out toe sure equipment was well maintained. Although the clinic did not have disabled access, the provider alerted people to this on their website and by word of mouth when people booked appointments.

The staff team was very small. Everyone felt that they worked well as a team to ensure people received a good service.

We saw that there was a complaints procedure in place. There had been no complaints about the service and staff told us how customer satisfaction was very important to them. They told us how they resolved issues before they became complaints.

 

 

Latest Additions: