We spoke with three people who had received a Magnetic Resonance Image [MRI] scan on the day of our visit. People told us they received care, treatment and support that met their needs. One person said, “I had excellent care and treatment here and the staff were great.” Another person said, “The staff were very nice and friendly. They explained everything and I could ask questions.

We found that people’s privacy, dignity and diversity were respected. The provider had taken steps to provide care in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. We saw improvements to the checks that the provider had in place to ensure that people were protected from the risk of infection. People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had given staff clear guidance staff to follow if they had any concerns and staff were given training on safeguarding people. People told us that they would feel able to raise any concerns. The provider gave us information that patient feedback in February 2013 showed that the service had achieved a 100% patient satisfaction score.

We spoke with one person who had received a Magnetic Resonance Image [MRI] on the day of our visit. They told us that they had received information about the procedure before coming and that this had included helpful information on what to wear and what to expect. They said, “I was well looked after while I was here. Everything was explained to me and I could hear the[radiographer] telling me how long each scan would take and that was ok.”

Our discussions with staff and our review of records showed us that people received safe and personalised care. This was achieved through co-ordinated assessment, planning and delivery of care. We saw that staff checked people’s medical information and history with them to ensure their safety and well being. Information about the procedure was available to people in a range of formats so they had understanding on which to give their consent.

We found that there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

There were no records of audits and checks on managing the risks of infection. Records of when the unit was cleaned were not completed regularly to show it was cleaned routinely. This meant that systems to reduce the risk of infection were not effectively implemented.

On the morning of our visit to the Essex Nuffield MRI, the unit was closed for servicing and therefore we were unable to speak with patients directly.

We looked through the comment book which was available to patients in the waiting room and saw that all comments made over the last year were very positive about the delivery of care by staff working on the unit.

In November 2011, one parent of a patient commented “Thank you for being so friendly and for putting my son at ease and explaining everything to us, really lovely staff.”

In December 2011, another patient commented “So helpful, polite, courteous and reassuring.”

A patient satisfaction survey was undertaken in August 2010. 1099 surveys were completed and returned. The evaluation of the survey showed that 97% of the patients rated their overall experience as above average or excellent.

99% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the way staff dealt with them during their examination and 98% of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the information given regarding obtaining their results.

A patient survey undertaken by the PCT in August 2011 showed 81.25% satisfaction with clarity of explanation and information, 100% satisfaction with promptness of appointment time, 100% satisfaction in regard to respect for privacy and dignity and 100% satisfaction with the quality of the service received.