Kent Hospital improves safety rating in latest inspection

East Kent Hospitals have improved according to the Care Quality Commission

Shaun Lintern
Health Correspondent
Thursday 05 August 2021 13:02
Comments
<p>The William Harvey Hospital</p>

The William Harvey Hospital

A scandal-hit NHS trust has had its safety rating for medical care increased by the Care Quality Commission after an inspection found improvements.

The watchdog has now increased the safety rating for the William Harvey Hospital, in Kent, from inadequate to requires improvement.

The hospital, run by the East Kent Hospitals University NHS Foundation Trust, was criticised by the CQC in October after staff and members of the public raised concerns about a lack of infection control amid outbreaks of Covid-19.

The East Kent trust has faced criticism over its standards of care in recent months and is separately facing an independent inquiry into poor maternity care after revelations by The Independent last year over dozens of baby deaths and brain injuries.

It could also face a police prosecution and was fined a total of £761,000 after being prosecuted by the CQC earlier this year over the death of baby Harry Richford in 2017.

Amanda Williams, CQC’s head of hospital inspection, said: “I am pleased to report that since our last inspection, leaders have worked hard to improve infection control practices in the medical care services departments at both hospitals, although some improvements still need to be fully embedded, particularly at William Harvey Hospital.

“We also found that there was a positive culture in the service across both hospitals, and staff felt empowered to report incidents. These were fully investigated by managers and, importantly, learnings were shared with the wider team.”

But she warned inspectors did also have concerns that patient records were not always up to date including important risk assessments and whether patients were drinking enough.

She added: “This was despite being told by the coroner in July last year that fluid balance monitoring needed to improve to prevent future patient deaths. This was after fluid overload contributed to the death of a patient in the hospital.

“Across both hospitals, our inspectors found records relating to people’s fluid balances were consistently incomplete or not completed at all. It is important to check how much fluid patients take on and how much goes out, otherwise people could be at risk of dehydration or becoming overloaded with fluid.

“Trust leaders told us they would address our concerns as a matter of urgency, and we will continue to monitor their progress.”

In the latest report inspectors said there were enough nurses and support staff and staffing levels were regularly reviewed and adjusted.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in