Agenda item

The Panel are asked to consider a verbal update from representatives of the Royal United Hospital (RUH) Bath on the latest Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection.

The Chairman invited James Scott (Chief Executive RUH) to give a verbal update to the Panel.

James Scott briefed the Panel on the latest CQC inspection to the RUH.

The CQC had been visiting acute hospitals first and soon they would be visiting mental health trusts.  The CQC had identified 18 pilots sites (hospitals) – six of those were low risk trusts, six were higher risk trusts and the last six were in the middle (RUH Bath included).  The CQC would produce a quality summit report once all inspections are completed.  The inspection at the RUH happened from 4-6 December 2013 with around forty of inspectors on site. Five or six academics were amongst those forty inspectors, doing a research into the process itself, as a pilot exercise. 

At previous inspections there were two or three inspectors on site with generic skills/experience.  This time, the RUH were inspected by a group of generic inspectors (up to six of them), clinicians with different expertise and from different parts NHS organisations and patient representatives (experts by experience).

The inspection lasted for two and a half days.  The RUH also had an unannounced inspection on Sunday afternoon where inspectors spent six hours checking on all the wards and departments in the RUH.

James Scott also said that he received a report on Wednesday (15^th January) which was shared with the RUH management to look at factual accuracies in the report.  A quality summit, set up by the CQC, would happen on 4^th February.  This would not be a public meeting though two stakeholders would be invited for that meeting – representatives from the Council and also from the Healthwatch.  The RUH would also invite representatives from Wilshire considering that the RUH catchment area extends to that region.  The idea behind the quality summit was to look at the CQC report and to consider what actions were required as per the CQC’s recommendations.

The CQC checked the following about care services:

• Are they safe?
• Are they effective?
• Are they caring?
• Are they responsive to people’s needs?
• Are they well-led?

The CQC looked at seven services in the RUH:

• A&E
• Medicine (cardiology, diabetes, older people’s care
• Surgery
• Intensive Care
• Children Services
• End of Life Care
• Outpatients

The report would become public sometime after 4^th February 2014.

The Chairman commented that the previous CQC inspection were critical about record keeping in the RUH.

James Scott responded that the CQC were critical on record keeping on the wards.  The CQC didn’t criticise the quality of care that patients were getting on the wards.  The issue was about nursing issue – nurses were not capturing all of the interventions they were making and, as a consequence, that could create the potential for harm. 

The Chairman anticipated that the outcome of the CQC inspection would be satisfactory.  The Chairman asked when the RUH would proceed with the Foundation Trust (FT) status.

James Scott responded that the CQC (quality regulator) and the Monitor (economic regulator) would have to give at least ‘good’ rating before the RUH could move forward with the FT application.

Councillor Jackson asked if the CQC just inspected functions in the RUH or they also inspected the cleanliness and the state of the building.

James Scott responded that the CQC did not comment on designs and similar in the hospital though they did inspect cleanliness.

It was RESOLVED to note verbal update from James Scott and to receive a full report at the next meeting of the Panel (March 2014).