SpaMedica Exeter

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This means we looked for evidence the service met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

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

The evidence showed a good standard The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Patients who used services were involved in planning and making shared decisions about their care and treatment, so it centred around them and their needs. Bookings for the service were managed centrally by the provider. This ensured patients could attend the service best suited to their needs and location. If there were any particular patient needs, this was stated on the referral and head office use this information to plan for the procedure.

Patients understood their condition, care and treatment options (including any associated risks and benefits) and any advice provided.

The service was fully accessible to patients with limited mobility or in a wheelchair. Wheelchairs are available. A hearing loop was provided. The service also offered free complimentary patient transport. This reduces barriers to treatment for patients who may struggle with mobility or who live alone and would not be able to travel following treatment.

The evidence showed a good standard. The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

There was continuity in patients’ care and treatment because services were flexible and joined up. The staff communicated with the community optometrists and patients GP’s both pre- and post-surgery to ensure there was continuity of care. The hospital manager spoke of the clear referral pathways they now have with their local acute NHS provider.

Patients’ care and treatment was delivered in a way that met their assessed needs from services that were co-ordinated and responsive.

The evidence showed a good standard. The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

There was a lot of information available on the notice boards around the hospital. There were various leaflets that provided information on procedures in the waiting area. Information could also be made available in other languages. Staff explained they could get leaflets in larger font, though there were no leaflets in braille.

Patient information was handled at head office to book pre-assessment appointments and capture preferred method of contact. Patients could receive confirmation by email or printed letter. Patients were advised they would not be able to drive following surgery. We observed patients being provided with written information following their surgery. Patient reminders were automated from head office.

The website was detailed and easy to navigate. It provided a detailed video walk through the hospital, demonstrating the pathway the patient will undertake. It also explained the various diagnostic tests and surgery as well as aftercare.

One of the patients we spoke with said everything was explained in the provided booklet and felt they could easily contact someone if they had a question.

The evidence showed a good standard. The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Patients knew how to give feedback about their experiences of care and support including how to raise any concerns or issues and could do so in a range of accessible ways. There was a copy of the complaint’s procedure available in the reception. The manager shared feedback from complaints with staff when required or during monthly cascade meetings.

Learning from complaints and concerns was seen as an opportunity for improvement. The manager advised they had received 12 complaints but no common themes. The manager advised some feedback has been regarding signage regarding toilets which they addressed.

Patients were all asked to provide feedback at their post-operative check. This was monitored weekly to ensure no patients were missed. At the time of assessment, the score was 100% positive feedback.

The evidence showed an excellent standard. The provider was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service ensured patients could access care, treatment and support when they needed to and in a way which worked for them. The service had clear exclusion criteria and accepted the majority of patients but did not accept bariatric or patients who required sedation. Bariatric patients and sedation were supported at other SpaMedica locations and attendance was coordinated through head office.

Patients could expect their care, treatment and support to be accessible and timely. Head office received the referral and booked the pre-assessment appointment. At pre-assessment the patient co-ordinator booked the theatre date, and post theatre would book the 4–6-week post operative appointment. Since May 2023 they have consistently seen 96% of patient within 18 weeks. According to NHS data, the number of patients seen within 18 weeks was better than the national average for independent health providers. We spoke to some patients who commented they had only waited a short time for their first appointment and were very impressed with the service.

There was free ample parking available. The provider offered a free door-to-door transport service for those who needed it. There was a specific criterion as the person needed to be able to get into the vehicle independently. Patients requiring reasonable adjustments were supported with wheelchair access at entrance and exit points. There were accessible slopes and handrails throughout the service.

Staff provided examples of how they could support people to access the service and adjust or make accommodations to help with their experience. People who did not speak English as their first language could access the service; there were translation services available to support people.

There was an emergency support line for all patients to call 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

The evidence showed a good standard. Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff and leaders considered information about patients who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and looked at ways to improve this.

The provider had policies to support the effective delivery of the applicable equality and human rights legislation. They had mandatory training for staff which included equality, diversity, learning disability and autism as well as sensory impairment. This ensured all staff have the right skills to support all patients.

If a patient cancelled their appointment, they would call the call centre who then cancel the appointment on the system and will reorganise. If SpaMedica need to cancel they would call patient as far in advance as possible to cancel and rebook theatre dates. The hospital manager said the next date would usually be within a few weeks.

The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

Patients told us the information they received was clear and accurate and provided in a way they could understand. They were supported to make informed choices about their care and plan for the future. Each patient had a personalised care and treatment plan tailored to their individual needs. The provider has a national sight support team to support patients living with sight loss or low vision.

Staff worked well together as an effective multidisciplinary team throughout the patient journey from the initial referral to the pre-operative assessment and throughout the patient’s surgery.