- Independent hospital
Nuffield Health North Staffordshire Hospital
Assessment report published 21 September 2026
Contents
Ratings - Surgery
Our view of the service
The date of the assessment was the 7 and 8 July 2026. The reason for the assessment was due to an aged rating.
The hospital has 36 en-suite bedrooms. There are 3 operating theatres, including endoscopy facilities and 1 minor operating unit. Two of the theatres have laminar flow and 1 has conventional theatre airflow. Specialities include orthopaedics, general surgery, women's health, cosmetic surgery, endoscopy, imaging and diagnostics.
We assessed all quality statements across the safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led key questions and have combined the scores for these areas to give an overall rating. The surgical department was rated Good overall.
Safe:
The service had a good learning culture and staff and patients could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly and lessons learned and improvements were identified and shared with staff. Patients were protected and kept safe because staff understood local safeguarding arrangements and safe systems of working.
There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience in departments, wards and in theatres to ensure high-quality care and treatment. Managers made sure staff received training and had regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care.
Staff managed medicines safely. Staff identified and reacted to unexpected deterioration in a patient’s condition. Staff understood and managed risks from the environment. The facilities and equipment met the needs of patients, were clean and well-maintained and any risks were mitigated.
Effective:
Patients, and where appropriate those close to them, were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of patient’s physical emotional, communication and personal care needs. Care and treatment was based on latest evidence and good practice guidance. Patient outcomes met expectations, and harm free care was the norm. Patients’ pain was quickly identified and well managed.
Staff assessed patients nutritional and hydration needs. Staff made sure patients understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.
Caring:
Staff treated patients with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated patients as individuals and supported their preferences. Staff responded to patients in a timely way. Patients had the opportunity to ask questions and were given access to specialist services, including from allied health professionals. The service supported staff wellbeing.
Responsive:
Patients, or their representatives, were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. The service provided information which patients could understand. Patients were invited to give feedback, knew who to speak with if they had concerns and were confident the service took their concerns seriously.
The service monitored and worked to improve access. The environment was adjusted to meet the needs of people with conditions which could create a barrier to access.
The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through service planning, quality monitoring, staff training and feedback. Patients were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.
Well-led:
Leaders and staff knew the service’s local vision, aims and objectives and understood how their service aligned with this. There was a culture based on speaking up, listening, learning and trust.
Staff felt their immediate leaders were visible and supportive. They told us how they felt they were approachable and spoke of seeing the hospital director when they did coffee mornings or attended the morning huddle. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment.
Staff understood their roles and responsibilities.
Leaders had sound oversight of the quality of service being delivered through effective governance and risk management systems.
There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff able to contribute ideas through a quality improvement programme.
People's experience of this service
Patients were mostly positive about the staff treating them with warmth and kindness and providing effective care and treatment. Patients confirmed their pain was well managed, they said their call bells were answered quickly, and they could get assistance if needed. They were aware of the costs involved in their treatment, gave consent and spoke of brilliant consultants. However, they also felt that the food menu could be improved.