Enter and view: Magnolia Unit

Download (PDF 593KB)
You voted 'No'.

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Enfield gather information on people’s experiences of health and social care services and there are times when it is appropriate for Healthwatch Enfield to see and hear for themselves how services are being delivered: these visits are called ‘Enter and View’, they are not inspections. Healthwatch Enfield visited Magnolia Unit on 17/07/2018. The summary of findings highlighted areas in relation to patient feedback, staff feedback and observation. These findings informed, Healthwatch Enfield found the Magnolia unit to be a friendly environment, with a good layout for the patients enabling them to be re-habilitated in an appropriate timescale. There was good interaction with the staff, working as a multi-disciplinary team and willing to take on each other’s tasks. The patient’s main concern was around ‘boredom’ and some consideration should be given to this to promote patients’ well-being during their stay. The management were actively looking to improve the experience and outcomes for patients although this was driven by the recent CQC inspection report. Some of the issues identified were longstanding and possibly investment in the unit has not been a Trust priority. Systems such as the call bell and improvements to the garden areas should be implemented. Overall, the unit appears to be well-run. The move towards a co-production methodology is to be encouraged. There were 9 recommendations in this report which included areas around the themes of quality improvements, system for notification of equipment failures, risk assessment around security and recruitment of volunteers and staff.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Enter and view: Magnolia Unit
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Enfield
Date of publication 
Tuesday, 17 July, 2018
Date evidence capture began 
Tuesday, 17 July, 2018
Date evidence capture finished 
Tuesday, 17 July, 2018
Type of report 
Enter and view
Key themes 
Building and facilities
Health protection
Information providing
Quality of staffing
Quality of treatment
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Staff levels
Staff training
Healthwatch reference number 

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
What type of organisation requested the work 
Primary research method used 
Structured interview
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 

Details of health and care services included in the report

Secondary care services 
Acute services with overnight beds
Acute services without overnight beds / listed acute services with or without overnight beds

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
Age group 
Not known
Not known
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
Does the information include staff's views? 
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
All care professionals
Does the information include other people's views? 
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 

Outcomes and impact

Were recommendations made by local Healthwatch in the report? 
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 

Network Impact
Relationships that exist locally, regionally, nationally have benefited from the work undertaken in the report
Implied Impact
Where it is implied that change may occur in the future as a result of Healthwatch work. This can be implied in a provider  response, press release or other source. Implied impact can become tangible impact once change has occurred.
Tangible Impact
There is evidence of change that can be directly attributed to Healthwatch work undertaken in the report.