Tyneside Surgical Services is an independent healthcare provider for predominantly NHS patients, located at the Peter Smith Surgery Centre, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead. The service works in collaboration with Gateshead Health NHS Trust (GHNT). The pathway of care for patients is delivered within GHNT facilities, with patients accessing identical facilities and services as a Gateshead patient. The relationship between Tyneside Surgical Services and GHNT is governed by contractual agreements.

Patients requiring an elective procedure are operated on in the Peter Smith Surgery Centre, where there are four operating theatres. The Surgery Centre provides day surgery and inpatient stays for Tyneside Surgical Services patients on level one and two. Patients report to reception, which is the central administration point for the Surgery centre. GHNT staff manage this.

We inspected this service as part of our programme of inspection of independent health providers. We carried out an announced inspection visit on 26 September 2017.

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.

We rated this service as good overall.

We found the following areas of good practice:

• Incidents were reported and dealt with effectively. There were no serious patient safety incidents reported in relation to the service between April 2016 and March 2017.
• Policies and procedures were in place. The host hospital provided some of these relating to medicines management, infection control and maintenance of the environment and equipment. There was effective sharing of information between the two organisations.
• There were processes in place to protect vulnerable patients and staff were aware of their responsibilities.
• Care was planned and delivered in line with national evidence based guidance. Patient outcomes were measured.
• Suitably trained, competent staff delivered care and treatment. There was evidence of good multidisciplinary working.
• Patients gave positive feedback about the care and treatment they had received.
• Patients had timely access to initial assessment and diagnosis. Most patients received treatment within 18 weeks of referral.
• The service had a clearly defined vision and values. Key risks to the service were recorded and managed.
• The service had a contract with the host trust, which was regularly reviewed. Staff had built good relationships with host trust staff and there was good communication and sharing of information.

Ellen Armistead

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (North)

People who used the service said “…everything was first class”, “…very happy with the surgery and the aftercare”, “I am very happy. I have totally been looked after especially the aftercare” and “…this is the best care I have ever received at a hospital”. One person told us “…everyone is polite, courteous and there are no issues or concerns.”

Staff told us they were “…well supported” and this helped them to deliver “…very good care”. We were told by a recently appointed member of staff they felt “…settled, happy, welcomed and enjoy the nature of the work.”

We saw the premises were well furnished, clean and situated in appropriate surroundings and a comfortable environment.

We checked patient records and saw before people received care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. We confirmed staff received training and support to deliver care and treatment safely to patients.

There were systems in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people used the service and others.

People were given all the information they needed to make an informed decision about their treatment, and were asked to sign their consent to such treatment. We saw no treatment was undertaken until full consent was given and the benefits and risks of treatment were explained.

People were cared for effectively and they were protected from the risk of abuse.

Staff at the service were given regular training and were given a professional appraisal of their work.

A complaints system was in place that encouraged patient feedback as important for improving the service. Complaints were taken seriously and responded to appropriately.

People were positive about the treatment they received. Comments included “I have had treatment before and I knew all about TSS. The treatment was good and they explained everything” and “Staff were very good and the meals were very good.”