Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Ultrasound Scanning Services Ltd, London.

Ultrasound Scanning Services Ltd in London is a Diagnosis/screening specialising in the provision of services relating to caring for adults over 65 yrs, caring for adults under 65 yrs and diagnostic and screening procedures. The last inspection date here was 5th April 2019

Ultrasound Scanning Services Ltd is managed by Ultrasound Scanning Services Limited.

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: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-04-05
    Last Published 2019-04-05

Local Authority:

    Brent

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.

5th February 2019 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Ultrasound Scanning Services Ltd is operated by Ultrasound Scanning Services Ltd. The Service offers diagnostic tests in the form of ultrasounds for adults. The service has one treatment room and a reception area.

The service provides scans for; early pregnancy 3D or 4D, gender reveal, upper abdomen, pelvic, kidneys and bladder, testes, thyroid, carotid arteries, musculoskeletal such as muscles and tendons, shoulders and conditions including deep vein thrombosis.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the unannounced part of the inspection on 05 February 2019. We went back to do a planned follow up inspection on 15 February 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 rated the service as Good overall.

We found areas of practice that was good at this diagnostic service:

  • Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and recognise different types of abuse.

  • The cleaning wipes used for the transvaginal probe were in line with national recommendations.

  • The service reported 100% compliance in their handwashing audits.

  • Service users with a wheelchair could access the service easily, either via the ramp at the main door or at the side entrance.

  • The service complied with the pause and check guidance from the Society of Radiographers.

  • The service followed guidelines set out by the British Medical Ultrasound Society, Society of Radiographers for professional ultrasound practice and The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

  • The service operated seven days a week and provided flexible appointment to meet the needs of their patients.

  • Patients we spoke with said that staff were thorough and took the time to explain findings with them.

  • Staff we spoke with stressed the importance of treating patients as individuals.

  • The service accommodated urgent referrals by ensuring that two urgent appointment slots were available every day.

  • Prices of ultrasound scans were clearly visible to service users.

  • Ultrasound reports were sent to the patient’s GP within two working days for NHS patients.

  • The service was managed by the lead radiographer who was suitably qualified for the role.

  • The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.

However,

  • Staff were not up to date in mandatory and safeguarding training.

  • The service did not hold cleaning logs of the service and we could not see documentation that supported daily cleaning.

  • The service did not have access to an interpretation service, we found that this was rectified on our follow up inspection.

  • The service did not have a documented vision or strategy.

  • The risks in the risk register did not have an entry date or a mitigated date.

  • The manager regularly audited the radiographers work but did not share feedback from these audits with staff.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve.

Professor Edward Baker

Chief Inspector of Hospitals

 

 

Latest Additions: