The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

The Sloane Hospital

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

125 Albemarle Road, Beckenham, Kent, BR3 5HS (020) 8466 4000

Provided and run by:
Circle Health Group Limited

All Inspections

12 January 2023

During a routine inspection

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as good because:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients and acted on them. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Services were contactable for support seven days a week.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

  • Some services relied upon agency staff to ensure safe staffing levels were achieved and the service generally lacked consistency with their record keeping.
  • Not all services had clear written protocols to guide staff to care for patients and not all departmental risk assessments were kept up to date.

2, 3 and 16 July 2019

During a routine inspection

BMI The Sloane Hospital is operated by BMI Healthcare.  The hospital has 32 beds spread over two wards. Facilities include two operating theatres and 12 consultant rooms in outpatients. There is a separate physiotherapy department consisting of a gym, studio and five consulting rooms. The hospital provides surgery, medical care (endoscopy), services for children and young people (from the age of three) and outpatients.

We inspected the hospital using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out an unannounced  inspection between 2 - 3 &16 July 2019.  Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The main service provided by this hospital was surgery. Where our findings on surgery, for example, management arrangements, also apply to other services, we do not repeat the information but cross-refer to the surgery report. We did not rate medicine as endoscopy was the only service provided in medicine and it was managed within the hospital's surgical service, therefore the ratings have been integrated with the surgery ratings.

Following the inspection the hospital confirmed they had stopped providing services for children and young people.

Services we rate

Our rating of this hospital went down. We rated it as requires improvement overall because:

  • Staff had not received training on how to care for children and young people.
  • The oversight and leadership of the service for children and young people was not sufficient or effective.
  • Children and young people were not always cared for in environments that were child friendly, risk assessed and met their needs.
  • Managers did not monitor the effectiveness and performance of the endoscopy service.
  • Theatres did not have secure access to protect it from unauthorised access.

However:

  • The hospital had made improvements since the last inspection in 2016. These included the installation of hand hygiene sinks in patients' rooms and replacing carpets with wooden flooring that reduced the risk of infection.
  • The hospital had systems for reporting, investigating and learning from incidents that occurred in the hospital and other BMI hospitals.
  • The hospital provided mandatory training in key skills to all staff and made sure everyone completed it.
  • The hospital had effective systems to control the risk of infection and minimise the risk of harm to patients.
  • Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well.
  • The hospital used current evidence-based guidance and quality standards to plan the delivery of care and treatment for patients. There were effective processes and systems in place to ensure guidelines and policies were updated and reflected best practice.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
  • In all services people could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • The hospital had improved engagement with patients and the community to plan and manage services.
  • Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued.

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.

Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (London and South)

17-18 August 2016

During a routine inspection

Overall, we rated the services at this hospital as good.

The hospital had taken action to mitigate risks to patients and surgical safety checklists were completed prior to surgery.

Patient records were up to date and contained all relevant information.

Medicines were managed safely and equipment was available and ready to use.

There were sufficient staff with appropriate qualifications to care for patients.

Staff were trained and aware of how to recognise the signs of abuse in adults and knew what action to take.

Care and treatment was informed by evidence based guidance.

Patients received effective pain relief.

Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and patients spoke positively about staff and the care they received.  We observed staff speaking to patients in a calm reassuring tone.

Access for treatment was generally good with a low rate for procedures being cancelled and patients being readmitted.

The hospital followed the BMI national complaints procedure and complaints were discussed at the Medical Advisory Committee and trends identified. They were also discussed at staff team meetings.

Services were well led and senior staff had oversight of the risks, with plans to mitigate them, for each area. An example of this was the suspension of children's services because they were not meeting the standards for children's services.

The daily inter-department (10@10) meeting was attended by staff from each service and the hospital manager had an opportunity to share information on activities, equipment, staffing and incidents.

Staff from all departments were positive about the local and hospital leadership and commented how it had improved since the appointment of the new hospital manager. Staff felt they were supported by the local and hospital leadership team and their views were sought through the staff forum.  

However:

Access to hand washing sinks and sinks did not comply with infection prevention and control guidelines. Floor coverings were not in line with infection prevention and control best practice guidance.

There was no formal rota for out of hours consultant cover.

Pre- procedure checks were performed, but the doctor had not always countersigned they were correct.

21 November 2013

During a routine inspection

People told us that staff were very good and that they had received good care at the hospital. We were told that people were aware of their discharge plan and had been provided with information regarding their operation and recovery time. One person told us 'the staff are wonderful, can't fault the service' and another said ' I'm very pleased with everything'.

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and regularly reviewed; the care plans reflected people's needs and the appropriate risk assessment were completed on admission. Medications were managed safely and documentation in the care plans was clear and legible. Records were stored securely and complaints were responded to within the appropriate timescales. The provider had systems in place to ensure that staff were recruited safely and the appropriate checks were completed prior to staff starting work at the home.

25 September 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us that staff were polite and courteous at all times and respected their privacy and they told us they were happy with the information provided by the hospital and consultant. People were aware of the questionnaire provided in their information packs. People told us that they were happy with the care and that the medical and nursing staff were extremely good, one person said that care had exceeded their expectations.

People told us that staff provided a menu that was varied and checked their meal order was correct, we were told by some people that they thought the choice of food was fabulous.