HELPING TO SHAPE CQC INSPECTIONS OF SPECIALIST CHILDREN'S TRUSTS

Aim To participate in a pilot Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of a specialist paediatric hospital and to provide feedback to improve further inspections. Method To meet the CQC's regulatory requirements, the methodology of the inspection process had been improved and refined. A ‘peer-r...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Archives of disease in childhood 2015-06, Vol.100 (6), p.e1-e1
Hauptverfasser: Khan, Farrah, Tomlin, Stephen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e1
container_issue 6
container_start_page e1
container_title Archives of disease in childhood
container_volume 100
creator Khan, Farrah
Tomlin, Stephen
description Aim To participate in a pilot Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of a specialist paediatric hospital and to provide feedback to improve further inspections. Method To meet the CQC's regulatory requirements, the methodology of the inspection process had been improved and refined. A ‘peer-review’ model of inspection was now employed, utilising larger more inclusive teams to deliver a more in-depth inspection in a shorter time-frame (2 days). The inspection team consisted of general and specialist paediatricians, general and specialist children's nurses, pharmacists and other Allied Healthcare Professionals (AHPs), play therapists, managers and experts by experience (parents), supported by experienced CQC inspectors and data analysts. A training day prior to the inspection enabled the team to meet, become acquainted, learn about the CQC, understand individual roles and establish an inspection schedule. The inspection itself took the form of ward visits, individual interviews with key personnel, small group interviews, staff focus groups, observing care and speaking to service users and a public listening event was also held. Results The inspection-pharmacist was tasked with interviewing the chief pharmacist, leading a peer focus group of AHPs, conducting informal interviews with service staff, recording ward and service-provision observations, and providing expert advice to team members on medicines management issues. To ensure a consistent approach to inspections, all Trusts are assessed against the CQC's five domains (safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led); for each domain there is a generic set of ‘Key Lines of Enquiry’ (KLOE). During the inspection, twice daily corroborative meetings were held to allow team members to discuss emerging findings and any common themes causing concern. All collected pieces of evidence were rated against the KLOEs as objectively as possible. All aspects of medicines management were viewed: pharmacy work force, governance, error reporting, information provision to staff and parents, storage and procurement, safe practice and patient perception. At the end of the inspection the team was debriefed and feedback was collated and assimilated. This would be used as evidence in the inspection report. Conclusion The CQC inspection was fast-paced and very intensive with a huge amount to cover in a very short space of time. In addition to the feedback given during the inspection, a pharmacist's summary report was submitt
doi_str_mv 10.1136/archdischild-2015-308634.29
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1808696325</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A414912583</galeid><sourcerecordid>A414912583</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b2519-d0be171cab3f61e94b9b007485325d61118e00b7b6372bed59c8d3a8a855b50e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkUFPg0AQhTdGE2v1P5D0oBfqDsvCbrzYIC0kBGqh5w0L25aGlgptov_eJXgw3jxNZvLNzHt5CE0ATwGI85y3xa6sumJX1aVpYaAmwcwh9tTiV2gEtsP01Lav0QhjTEzOGLtFd123xxgsxsgIvQZ-tAzjhZElRhrMlr7hvXtGGKdL38vCJE6NZG70TTiLwjQzvCCM3lZ-_Jga2WqdZuk9utnkdacefuoYred-5gVmlCxCbxaZ0qLAzRJLBS4UuSQbBxS3JZcYuzajxKKlAwBMYSxd6RDXkqqkvGAlyVnOKJUUKzJGT8PdU9t8XFR3FgdtXNV1flTNpRPAtHPu6GsanfxB982lPWp1mtK2XY5drilzoLZ5rUR1LJrjWX2ei6au1VYJLd5LxMwGm4NFGdH8y8AXbdN1rdqIU1sd8vZLABZ9GuJ3GqJPQwxpCKv_5gzb8rD_1-I3PcuKSg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1828879079</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>HELPING TO SHAPE CQC INSPECTIONS OF SPECIALIST CHILDREN'S TRUSTS</title><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><creator>Khan, Farrah ; Tomlin, Stephen</creator><creatorcontrib>Khan, Farrah ; Tomlin, Stephen</creatorcontrib><description>Aim To participate in a pilot Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of a specialist paediatric hospital and to provide feedback to improve further inspections. Method To meet the CQC's regulatory requirements, the methodology of the inspection process had been improved and refined. A ‘peer-review’ model of inspection was now employed, utilising larger more inclusive teams to deliver a more in-depth inspection in a shorter time-frame (2 days). The inspection team consisted of general and specialist paediatricians, general and specialist children's nurses, pharmacists and other Allied Healthcare Professionals (AHPs), play therapists, managers and experts by experience (parents), supported by experienced CQC inspectors and data analysts. A training day prior to the inspection enabled the team to meet, become acquainted, learn about the CQC, understand individual roles and establish an inspection schedule. The inspection itself took the form of ward visits, individual interviews with key personnel, small group interviews, staff focus groups, observing care and speaking to service users and a public listening event was also held. Results The inspection-pharmacist was tasked with interviewing the chief pharmacist, leading a peer focus group of AHPs, conducting informal interviews with service staff, recording ward and service-provision observations, and providing expert advice to team members on medicines management issues. To ensure a consistent approach to inspections, all Trusts are assessed against the CQC's five domains (safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led); for each domain there is a generic set of ‘Key Lines of Enquiry’ (KLOE). During the inspection, twice daily corroborative meetings were held to allow team members to discuss emerging findings and any common themes causing concern. All collected pieces of evidence were rated against the KLOEs as objectively as possible. All aspects of medicines management were viewed: pharmacy work force, governance, error reporting, information provision to staff and parents, storage and procurement, safe practice and patient perception. At the end of the inspection the team was debriefed and feedback was collated and assimilated. This would be used as evidence in the inspection report. Conclusion The CQC inspection was fast-paced and very intensive with a huge amount to cover in a very short space of time. In addition to the feedback given during the inspection, a pharmacist's summary report was submitted which documented the positive aspects of the investigation, but also made suggestions for further improvement. It was noted that medicines management should be inspected across the hospital as a speciality in its own right as it impacts on many aspects of hospital service. The inspection team could have benefitted from having two pharmacists, each focussing on different aspects of medicines management. The paediatric pharmacist proved to be a valuable member of the inspection team, providing expert advice on medicines management issues in children, as well as identifying and highlighting areas normally associated with the greatest risk within the paediatric population.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9888</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-2044</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2015-308634.29</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ADCHAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</publisher><subject>Children's hospitals ; Company business management ; Focus Groups ; Health care teams ; Hospitals ; Inspection ; Interviews ; Management ; Medical personnel ; Play Therapy ; Quality management ; Resistance (Psychology) ; Training</subject><ispartof>Archives of disease in childhood, 2015-06, Vol.100 (6), p.e1-e1</ispartof><rights>Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><rights>Copyright: 2015 Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://adc.bmj.com/content/100/6/e1.22.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://adc.bmj.com/content/100/6/e1.22.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,314,776,780,3183,23550,27901,27902,77342,77373</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Khan, Farrah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tomlin, Stephen</creatorcontrib><title>HELPING TO SHAPE CQC INSPECTIONS OF SPECIALIST CHILDREN'S TRUSTS</title><title>Archives of disease in childhood</title><addtitle>Archives of Disease in Childhood</addtitle><description>Aim To participate in a pilot Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of a specialist paediatric hospital and to provide feedback to improve further inspections. Method To meet the CQC's regulatory requirements, the methodology of the inspection process had been improved and refined. A ‘peer-review’ model of inspection was now employed, utilising larger more inclusive teams to deliver a more in-depth inspection in a shorter time-frame (2 days). The inspection team consisted of general and specialist paediatricians, general and specialist children's nurses, pharmacists and other Allied Healthcare Professionals (AHPs), play therapists, managers and experts by experience (parents), supported by experienced CQC inspectors and data analysts. A training day prior to the inspection enabled the team to meet, become acquainted, learn about the CQC, understand individual roles and establish an inspection schedule. The inspection itself took the form of ward visits, individual interviews with key personnel, small group interviews, staff focus groups, observing care and speaking to service users and a public listening event was also held. Results The inspection-pharmacist was tasked with interviewing the chief pharmacist, leading a peer focus group of AHPs, conducting informal interviews with service staff, recording ward and service-provision observations, and providing expert advice to team members on medicines management issues. To ensure a consistent approach to inspections, all Trusts are assessed against the CQC's five domains (safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led); for each domain there is a generic set of ‘Key Lines of Enquiry’ (KLOE). During the inspection, twice daily corroborative meetings were held to allow team members to discuss emerging findings and any common themes causing concern. All collected pieces of evidence were rated against the KLOEs as objectively as possible. All aspects of medicines management were viewed: pharmacy work force, governance, error reporting, information provision to staff and parents, storage and procurement, safe practice and patient perception. At the end of the inspection the team was debriefed and feedback was collated and assimilated. This would be used as evidence in the inspection report. Conclusion The CQC inspection was fast-paced and very intensive with a huge amount to cover in a very short space of time. In addition to the feedback given during the inspection, a pharmacist's summary report was submitted which documented the positive aspects of the investigation, but also made suggestions for further improvement. It was noted that medicines management should be inspected across the hospital as a speciality in its own right as it impacts on many aspects of hospital service. The inspection team could have benefitted from having two pharmacists, each focussing on different aspects of medicines management. The paediatric pharmacist proved to be a valuable member of the inspection team, providing expert advice on medicines management issues in children, as well as identifying and highlighting areas normally associated with the greatest risk within the paediatric population.</description><subject>Children's hospitals</subject><subject>Company business management</subject><subject>Focus Groups</subject><subject>Health care teams</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Inspection</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Medical personnel</subject><subject>Play Therapy</subject><subject>Quality management</subject><subject>Resistance (Psychology)</subject><subject>Training</subject><issn>0003-9888</issn><issn>1468-2044</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkUFPg0AQhTdGE2v1P5D0oBfqDsvCbrzYIC0kBGqh5w0L25aGlgptov_eJXgw3jxNZvLNzHt5CE0ATwGI85y3xa6sumJX1aVpYaAmwcwh9tTiV2gEtsP01Lav0QhjTEzOGLtFd123xxgsxsgIvQZ-tAzjhZElRhrMlr7hvXtGGKdL38vCJE6NZG70TTiLwjQzvCCM3lZ-_Jga2WqdZuk9utnkdacefuoYred-5gVmlCxCbxaZ0qLAzRJLBS4UuSQbBxS3JZcYuzajxKKlAwBMYSxd6RDXkqqkvGAlyVnOKJUUKzJGT8PdU9t8XFR3FgdtXNV1flTNpRPAtHPu6GsanfxB982lPWp1mtK2XY5drilzoLZ5rUR1LJrjWX2ei6au1VYJLd5LxMwGm4NFGdH8y8AXbdN1rdqIU1sd8vZLABZ9GuJ3GqJPQwxpCKv_5gzb8rD_1-I3PcuKSg</recordid><startdate>201506</startdate><enddate>201506</enddate><creator>Khan, Farrah</creator><creator>Tomlin, Stephen</creator><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8A4</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AN0</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9-</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0R</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201506</creationdate><title>HELPING TO SHAPE CQC INSPECTIONS OF SPECIALIST CHILDREN'S TRUSTS</title><author>Khan, Farrah ; Tomlin, Stephen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b2519-d0be171cab3f61e94b9b007485325d61118e00b7b6372bed59c8d3a8a855b50e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Children's hospitals</topic><topic>Company business management</topic><topic>Focus Groups</topic><topic>Health care teams</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Inspection</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Medical personnel</topic><topic>Play Therapy</topic><topic>Quality management</topic><topic>Resistance (Psychology)</topic><topic>Training</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Khan, Farrah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tomlin, Stephen</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Education Periodicals</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Consumer Health Database</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Archives of disease in childhood</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Khan, Farrah</au><au>Tomlin, Stephen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>HELPING TO SHAPE CQC INSPECTIONS OF SPECIALIST CHILDREN'S TRUSTS</atitle><jtitle>Archives of disease in childhood</jtitle><addtitle>Archives of Disease in Childhood</addtitle><date>2015-06</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>100</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>e1</spage><epage>e1</epage><pages>e1-e1</pages><issn>0003-9888</issn><eissn>1468-2044</eissn><coden>ADCHAK</coden><abstract>Aim To participate in a pilot Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection of a specialist paediatric hospital and to provide feedback to improve further inspections. Method To meet the CQC's regulatory requirements, the methodology of the inspection process had been improved and refined. A ‘peer-review’ model of inspection was now employed, utilising larger more inclusive teams to deliver a more in-depth inspection in a shorter time-frame (2 days). The inspection team consisted of general and specialist paediatricians, general and specialist children's nurses, pharmacists and other Allied Healthcare Professionals (AHPs), play therapists, managers and experts by experience (parents), supported by experienced CQC inspectors and data analysts. A training day prior to the inspection enabled the team to meet, become acquainted, learn about the CQC, understand individual roles and establish an inspection schedule. The inspection itself took the form of ward visits, individual interviews with key personnel, small group interviews, staff focus groups, observing care and speaking to service users and a public listening event was also held. Results The inspection-pharmacist was tasked with interviewing the chief pharmacist, leading a peer focus group of AHPs, conducting informal interviews with service staff, recording ward and service-provision observations, and providing expert advice to team members on medicines management issues. To ensure a consistent approach to inspections, all Trusts are assessed against the CQC's five domains (safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led); for each domain there is a generic set of ‘Key Lines of Enquiry’ (KLOE). During the inspection, twice daily corroborative meetings were held to allow team members to discuss emerging findings and any common themes causing concern. All collected pieces of evidence were rated against the KLOEs as objectively as possible. All aspects of medicines management were viewed: pharmacy work force, governance, error reporting, information provision to staff and parents, storage and procurement, safe practice and patient perception. At the end of the inspection the team was debriefed and feedback was collated and assimilated. This would be used as evidence in the inspection report. Conclusion The CQC inspection was fast-paced and very intensive with a huge amount to cover in a very short space of time. In addition to the feedback given during the inspection, a pharmacist's summary report was submitted which documented the positive aspects of the investigation, but also made suggestions for further improvement. It was noted that medicines management should be inspected across the hospital as a speciality in its own right as it impacts on many aspects of hospital service. The inspection team could have benefitted from having two pharmacists, each focussing on different aspects of medicines management. The paediatric pharmacist proved to be a valuable member of the inspection team, providing expert advice on medicines management issues in children, as well as identifying and highlighting areas normally associated with the greatest risk within the paediatric population.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</pub><doi>10.1136/archdischild-2015-308634.29</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0003-9888
ispartof Archives of disease in childhood, 2015-06, Vol.100 (6), p.e1-e1
issn 0003-9888
1468-2044
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1808696325
source BMJ Journals - NESLi2
subjects Children's hospitals
Company business management
Focus Groups
Health care teams
Hospitals
Inspection
Interviews
Management
Medical personnel
Play Therapy
Quality management
Resistance (Psychology)
Training
title HELPING TO SHAPE CQC INSPECTIONS OF SPECIALIST CHILDREN'S TRUSTS
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T22%3A15%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=HELPING%20TO%20SHAPE%20CQC%20INSPECTIONS%20OF%20SPECIALIST%20CHILDREN'S%20TRUSTS&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20disease%20in%20childhood&rft.au=Khan,%20Farrah&rft.date=2015-06&rft.volume=100&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=e1&rft.epage=e1&rft.pages=e1-e1&rft.issn=0003-9888&rft.eissn=1468-2044&rft.coden=ADCHAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/archdischild-2015-308634.29&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA414912583%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1828879079&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A414912583&rfr_iscdi=true