• Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Archived: Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine

Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Charterhouse Square, London, EC1M 6BQ (020) 7888 2626

Provided and run by:
Queen Mary, University Of London Foundation

All Inspections

14 and 22 December 2021

During a routine inspection

We did not rate this service. This is because the CQC does not apply a rating to independent laboratory services. We found:

  • The service had enough laboratory staff to provide the right level of service and provided some training in key skills. The service controlled infection risk and managed cross contamination well. Staff kept good records. The service managed safety incidents and learned lessons from them.
  • Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and ensured they had access to good information. Key services were available as required to support timely care.
  • Staff spoke to patients to help them understand the tests and the results and were trained to provide emotional support to patients and their families.
  • The service was planned to meet the needs of local people and people could access the service when they needed it. They took account of people’s physical individual needs.
  • The service had a plan for the future. Staff felt valued and were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. The service engaged with the NHS trusts they supported, and all staff were committed to improving services for the future.

However:

  • The service lacked sufficient management capacity and were not able to provide all their training records for staff. There were some key skills that staff were not offered training in.
  • Managers did not keep accessible records of staff competencies.
  • The service did not provide support for patients whose first language was not spoken English and did not make it clear to people how to give feedback.
  • Leaders ran services using ineffective governance processes and poor quality management systems and were not routinely updating all documents clearly, this was exacerbated by a lack of capacity due to some management roles being unfilled for months. Staff did not have appraisals regularly and so lacked formal opportunities to request further training.

22, 26 March 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited the pathology laboratory over the course of the day and spoke with the manager and other staff. We also toured the laboratory premises. There were no people visiting the laboratory on the day of our visit who we could speak to about the service.

We found that protocols were in place to mitigate the risks of specimens being mixed up. People who use the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises and protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment.

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed. We found that staff received appropriate professional development.

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service.