• Community
  • Community healthcare service

Coloplast Clinical Service

Overall: Outstanding read more about inspection ratings

Nene Hall, Peterborough Business Park, Lynch Wood, Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, PE2 6FX

Provided and run by:
Coloplast Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 10 August 2021

Coloplast Care Nursing and Telehealth Service is part of a larger multinational commercial company and has been providing products and services to support people across England with intimate healthcare needs support since 1978. The Coloplast Nursing service provides community and hospital based specialist stoma/ostomy care, bladder and bowel management/continence care and advice to primarily adult patients across England. The service occasionally provides paediatric care but only with the attendance of a paediatric nurse from an external organisation. The provision of care is arranged through localised agreements with both acute and primary care service providers and local clinical commissioning groups (CCGs). Specialist nurses work with partner NHS providers and CCGs across 37 geographic locations. The nurses are integrated into the provider NHS organisations, by means of honorary contacts, and work to local pathways and policies.

The service first registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in September 2011 to provide the following regulated activity:

  • treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

There has been a registered managers in post since 2011.

The last inspection was a comprehensive inspection in 2016 where we did not rate the service.

We did make recommendations.

The service should;

  • Review information provided to staff on duty of candour to ensure there is a consistent level of understanding.
  • Review infection control arrangements to ensure these are up to date.
  • Review how assurance can be provided to senior management that all staff have completed the necessary nursing standards as set by Coloplast Ltd.
  • Review how the service can demonstrate that it is providing good patient outcomes.

During this inspection we saw that the service had addressed these areas.

Overall inspection

Outstanding

Updated 10 August 2021

We rated this location as outstanding 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, acted on them and kept good care records. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.

Staff provided good care and treatment. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.

Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness,and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.

The service developed care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and actively encouraged people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for care needs to be addressed.

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:

A staff member who occasionally saw children did not have the best practice recommended level three safeguarding training for children.