Nuffield Health Cheltenham Hospital

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 that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment this key question was not rated. At this assessment we rated outpatient services as 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.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service 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.

Patients reported that staff treated them well and demonstrated a high level of professionalism. Throughout our observations, interactions between staff and patients were consistently courteous, respectful, and polite. During a breast clinic appointment we observed, the consultant demonstrated exceptional compassion and responsiveness. A former patient had contacted him in the early hours of the morning after experiencing something concerning. They arranged to see the patient before their first scheduled appointment that same day, explaining, “I did not want you worrying for another night.” The patient left the appointment feeling reassured and cared for. Other patients also told us that staff were extremely caring and helpful.

Feedback from patients was positive and reflected a kind and compassionate approach to care. Patient survey results from April 2025 to March 2026 showed 260 out of 270 patients surveys said the outpatient experience was very good.

Staff consistently treated patients with dignity and maintained their privacy throughout appointments. Patients were seen in individual consulting rooms, ensuring conversations could not be overheard. For example, patients were given time to feel comfortable before examinations, and consultants checked that they were happy to proceed before any examination took place.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service 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.

We observed all staff treating people in a respectful manner from booking in at reception to the end of the outpatient session. We observed staff engaging with patients and checking patient’s wellbeing. One patient said “the consultant was excellent at explaining the complex issues with clarity and an understanding of me as an individual”.

Staff had completed training in autism and learning disability awareness. A recent review of practice for supporting people with autism and learning disabilities had led to several improvements, including updates to staff training, environmental adjustments, the introduction of visual aids, and the development of personalised care plans.

The service used a health passport for autistic people, which provided essential information for healthcare professionals. It outlined how the patient preferred to communicate, how they experienced and expressed pain, and any known triggers or challenges, along with strategies to help reduce distress. This supported staff to deliver care that was tailored, sensitive, and responsive to individual needs.

Staff held daily huddles to discuss any reasonable adjustments required for individual patients. This approach helped ensure that care was person‑centred, inclusive, and responsive to each patient’s specific needs.

Staff told us information leaflets could be translated into different languages and large print if required.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People using the service could be supported by family or friends during their consultation. Patients were offered a chaperone, and posters in patient areas highlighted this option. Chaperones helped maintain dignity during intimate examinations or procedures and provided emotional reassurance.

Patients were offered genuine choice regarding their treatment options and were supported to make informed decisions about their care. In one consultation we observed, the patient was presented with several different approaches to hip surgery, including options that the consultant himself did not provide. This ensured the patient received balanced, unbiased information to help them decide on the most appropriate treatment.

Staff provided patients with clear, accessible information about what to expect before treatment and how to prepare. We observed both medical and nursing staff taking time to explain treatment options in a straightforward way, checking each patient’s understanding and ensuring they felt fully informed.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes.

The service 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. The service worked with patients to understand and manage risks.

We observed a consultation in which the surgeon discussed the different surgical options available. As the patient wished to continue participating in sport, an option with higher associated risks was selected, as it aligned with the patient’s preferences. The patient demonstrated a clear understanding of these risks before making an informed decision.

The environment supported comfort and convenience, with hot drink machines and water coolers available in waiting areas for patients and relatives. The service had made environmental adjustments like quiet areas for patients with autism and learning difficulties and encouraged visits to the hospital prior to their appointment so as to reduce patient’s anxiety.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service cared about and promoted the well-being of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff had access to a wide range of well-being, health, and financial support. They were able to use the provider’s gyms to promote physical and mental wellbeing, and the hospital had designated wellbeing champions, trained mental health first aiders available to support colleagues.

The service also organised regular health‑promotion events, such as sessions on breast cancer awareness and stress awareness, with 43 staff members attending these activities. Staff were able to request flexible working arrangements, and adjustments to shift patterns were made where possible to help staff remain in work and maintain a healthy work–life balance.

Staff achievements were actively recognised and celebrated within the service. Daily huddles gave department leads the opportunity to acknowledge good practice and highlight individual contributions. Managers could also nominate staff for rewards, including a £25 voucher or complimentary meals from the staff canteen. In addition, a social committee organised events such as summer fêtes, Christmas parties, and breakfast mornings, helped to foster a positive and supportive team culture.

Staff views were collected quarterly. The outpatients department scored low on the statement “the demands of my workload are manageable,” with a rating of 3.8. This was 3.9 points below the provider’s benchmark, although it represented an improvement of 0.6 points compared with the October 2025 score. The service was seeking to recruit permanent healthcare assistants to help address workload pressures.

Following the staff survey, several improvements were introduced, including installing benches outside reception and adding flowers to the main reception area to enhance the working environment.