Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Bristol Urology Associates, Clifton, Bristol.

Bristol Urology Associates in Clifton, Bristol is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs, caring for children (0 - 18yrs), diagnostic and screening procedures, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 22nd February 2014

Bristol Urology Associates is managed by Bristol Urology Associates Ltd.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Bristol Urology Associates
      85 Alma Road
      Clifton
      Bristol
      BS8 2DP
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01179804118
    Website:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

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

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2014-02-22
    Last Published 2014-02-22

Local Authority:

    Bristol, City of

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.

4th February 2014 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

Our inspection of 29 September 2013 found that people were not adequately protected from the risk of unsafe or unsuitable equipment. This was because the provider did not always ensure resuscitation equipment was adequate, available and maintained. Specifically resuscitation equipment was available but the service did not have a defibrillator to help someone who had collapsed. This meant that people may not receive prompt emergency care and treatment to meet their needs.

We had found that there was no evidence of the local multi-agency safeguarding policies and procedures for either vulnerable adults or children. This meant that people were not protected from abuse because guidance about safeguarding people from abuse was not accessible to all staff.

We had also found that there were ineffective arrangements in place to demonstrate that staff were trained, competent and supported to provide safe and appropriate care to people. The provider wrote to us and informed us they would be complaint with the standards by 27 November 2003.

At this inspection we found the provider had ensured there was a defibrillator at the clinic so that people would receive prompt emergency treatment.

There was evidence multi-agency safeguarding procedures for vulnerable adults and children were available. This meant people were protected from abuse.

There were arrangements in place to demonstrate staff were competent and supported to provide suitable care to people.

2nd October 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

People attended the clinic for consultations and treatment for urology conditions. Children were seen for consultations only by a specialist paediatric doctor.

We spoke to the two registered managers who jobshare and a member of staff. There were no people available to speak to at the time of the visit and as there were no clinics arranged for that day.

People who use the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their treatment.

Suitable arrangements were made for people with mobility difficulties to access the service.

A survey of people's views was examined. The results showed that people thought highly of the service. We saw that people had written, “Overall a very efficient and friendly service….” and "X has been nothing short of fantastic."

The provision of appropriate resuscitation equipment and the arrangements for checking required review.

There was no copy of the local multi-agency safeguarding procedures.

There were ineffective arrangements in place to demonstrate that staff were trained, competent and supported to provide safe and appropriate care to people.

People's complaints were fully investigated and resolved, where possible, to their satisfaction. The complaints procedure was available to people in the waiting room and on the provider's website.

 

 

Latest Additions: