SpaMedica Exeter

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

This means we looked for evidence the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Caring.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Caring.

The evidence showed an excellent standard. The provider was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We observed that staff showed kindness and compassion to all patients. The care for patients was evident in culture, and the patient came first. Staff attitudes and behaviours when interacting with patients showed they were discreet, respectful and responsive, providing patients with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it.

Feedback from patients who used the service and those close to them were positive about the way staff treated them. We observed staff taking time to explain the treatment to patients and giving them time to ask questions. Patients’ welfare was constantly checked on during the theatre procedure, and they were shown kindness and compassion throughout their time there.

Staff were observed respecting patients’ dignity. People were assured information about them was treated confidentially, and they knew staff respected their privacy. Staff made sure conversations were not overheard. Patient records were kept secure. We observed interactions between patients and staff where staff ensured patients dignity was maintained. There were screens between patients’ chairs in the ward area. Support continued after discharge with a dedicated phoneline for any patient queries regarding their treatment.

We looked at feedback on external feedback sites, although this is for the provider, there were specific positive examples of care regarding SpaMedica Exeter. Comments included the fast response to the referral and treatment as well as “how supportive and friendly the staff were.”

The evidence showed a good standard. The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service was fully accessible to wheelchair users and patients whose mobility may be restricted. Signage throughout the premises was clear. The service had free hot and cold drinks and biscuits available for patients’ post-surgery. If there were long delays to appointments or surgery, the staff provided patients with food.

The service treated patients as individuals and made sure patients’ care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. Staff understood the individual needs of patients, including their personal, cultural, social and religious needs. Staff told us appointments were offered to reflect all needs.

Patients’ communication needs were mostly met to enable them to engage in their care, treatment and support to maximise their experience and outcomes. The service booked interpreters for patients who required them. Information was available on noticeboards and in leaflets. Information was not always provided in all formats for patients who were partially sighted and were not able to read information displayed or in information leaflets. However, staff said they could print information in large font.

The evidence showed a good standard. The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The service promoted patients’ independence, so patients knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Patients were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing. Patients told us they were fully informed of all the treatment options available to them.

During the assessment we observed staff clearly explaining in a way people could understand, what was going to happen next. People using the service told us they understood their care and treatment. Patients were given the opportunity to ask questions.

Staff received training in equality and diversity to support people as individuals.

The evidence showed a good standard. The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff were alert to patient’s needs and took the time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs. All patients had a pre-operative assessment where the nurses discussed immediate needs. Where a patient had particular needs, these were accommodated as far as possible.

A booklet of the patient journey was available to all patients. Patients were offered a chaperone if requested.

There was CCTV throughout the main patient areas so staff in reception could observe the waiting areas and could act promptly if needed.

The evidence showed a shortfall in this area. Although the service promoted the wellbeing of their staff, some staff stated they had not felt supported to always deliver person centered care.

The hospital manager acknowledged, due to changes in workflow, staff were supporting other locations which impacted on the team’s wellbeing. They had developed an internal system to monitor and recognise the distance some staff were travelling. Staff covered other locations as required, as defined in their contract of employment. We found 22% of the team at Exeter had covered activity at other locations over the last 12 months. There was a wide variance in the number of clinics covered over a 12-month period; from 1 clinic a month, to several in a week.

We spoke to several staff, overall staff were positive regarding working at SpaMedica Exeter, the main feedback was about the impact of travelling to other sites and vacancies not being filled. Staff knew it was due to changes in workstreams, and to ensure business continuity. Some staff felt communication could be improved and there were concerns regarding the size of some of the clinics. Overall staff told us they felt supported by their manager and there was an ‘open door policy’ if they wanted to discuss any concerns or personal difficulties. Some staff raised concerns about the departure of the current hospital manager and the potential impact this may have while a new manager is recruited.

All staff had access to an application which gave access to a range of services such as core and optional benefits, employee discounts and wellbeing resources. The provider recognised staff success within the service and had the Employee of the Month, Hero notifications and quarterly staff awards. There were workforce champions and an employee forum. The service had policies and procedures to support staff’s well-being.