• Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Nuffield Health Brighton Hospital

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Warren Road, Woodingdean, Brighton, East Sussex, BN2 6DX (01273) 624488

Provided and run by:
Nuffield Health

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 6 December 2022

Nuffield Health Brighton Hospital, part of the Nuffield Health group, is an independent hospital situated in Woodingdean on the outskirts of Brighton. Nuffield Health Brighton Hospital provides elective surgery to patients who pay for themselves, are insured, or are NHS funded patients. Surgical specialities offered include orthopaedics, ophthalmology, general surgery and gender affirmation surgery. Nuffield Health Brighton Hospital does not offer surgical services for children.

The hospital has 41 patient rooms with en-suite facilities and a number of outpatient consulting rooms, including bespoke oncology, dental and ophthalmic suites.

There are three operating theatres each with an integral anaesthetic room, a dedicated endoscopy suite, and four bay recovery units.

There are on-site imaging facilities including X-ray, ultrasound, digital mammography, CT and MRI.

The hospital has onsite phlebotomy, physiotherapy and pharmacy teams.

We inspected this hospital as part of our national programme to validate our direct monitoring approach. We inspected surgery only and this was a focused inspection to look at the safe and well led domains only.

The service is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• Diagnostic and screening procedures

• Family planning

• Surgical procedures

• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury

The service has a registered manager with the CQC.

The service had a comprehensive inspection in July 2016 and was rated good overall.

Overall inspection


Updated 6 December 2022

Our rating of this location stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

Services for children & young people

Insufficient evidence to rate

Updated 8 February 2018

We were not able to rate this service due to the low numbers of children being treated at the hospital.  However, we found

Staff understood their responsibilities regarding incident reporting and there was a culture of learning from incidents. There were plans in place to respond to emergencies and major incidents. Staffing levels and skill mix were planned, implemented and reviewed to keep children and young people safe.

The hospital managed patients’ records in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

Appointment times were flexible and offered around school hours. Facilities were suitable for children and young people.

The hospital had clear structures, processes and systems of accountability in place.

Medical care (including older people’s care)


Updated 8 February 2018

We rated medical care services as good overall because:

The hospital had systems and processes in place to keep patients free from harm. Infection prevention and control practices were in line with national guidelines. The environment was visibly clean, tidy and fit for purpose.

Staff kept medical records accurately and securely. Medicines were stored in locked cupboards and administration was in line relevant legislation.

The endoscopic services demonstrated compliance with British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) guidelines. Oncology services demonstrated compliance with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.

Medical care services had an appropriate level of competent staff to meet patients’ needs. Staff completed appraisals regularly and mangers encouraged them to develop their skills further.

Managers were visible, approachable and effective. Staff overwhelmingly reported the hospital had a ‘family feel’.

Staff interacted with patients in a kind and caring manner. Patients told us they felt relaxed when having their treatment and were overwhelmingly positive about their experience of care.

Outpatients and diagnostic imaging


Updated 8 February 2018

We rated the Nuffield Brighton Hospital outpatient and diagnostic imaging service as good because:

Systems were in place for keeping patients safe and staff were aware of how to report incidents and safeguarding issues. Staffing levels were sufficient to meet the needs of patients. The waiting areas and consulting rooms were visibly clean, tidy and free from clutter.

Imaging equipment was appropriately maintained and legislative requirements relating to the safe use of ionising radiation were met. Laboratory facilities were accredited by a nationally recognised external body.

Staff worked as part of multi-disciplinary team and sought consent from patients in accordance with corporate policy and legislation, including the Mental Capacity Act.

Staff were enthusiastic and caring and there were positive interactions between staff and patients who spoke well of their experience.

There were clearly defined local leadership roles in each speciality within the outpatients and diagnostic imaging areas. Managers and the senior leadership team provided visible leadership and motivation to their teams and there was appropriate management of quality and governance at a local level.


There was no effective process for the monitoring of prescription pads and not all members of staff were trained to an appropriate level in safeguarding children.