Hamptons 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

We looked for evidence that people were always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We checked that people’s privacy and dignity was respected, that they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. We also looked for evidence that every effort was made to take people’s wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good

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 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and took account of their individual needs. We observed a strong person-centred culture, and staff were committed to providing kind and compassionate care.

Staff we spoke with demonstrated and understanding of, and respect for, patients’ individual needs. On the day of our inspection, we observed staff offering a patient a private area to remove their body piercings. Staff checked that the patient felt comfortable and explained the MRI procedure clearly and appropriately. When we spoke with this patient about their experience of care, they told us they were very satisfied with the waiting time for their appointment. The patient said they felt “listened to” and reported that staff contacted them promptly to arrange their appointment.

Patients also told us that staff provided detailed aftercare instructions, which contributed to a positive patient experience.

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.

People who used the service told us that staff treated them as individuals and took their needs and preferences into account when undertaking scan procedures. They told us staff clearly explained the scan procedures to them in a way they could understand.

Staff we spoke with demonstrated an understanding of the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion policy, which promoted equality, respected religious beliefs, and addressed the disability needs of patients.

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.

Patients told us staff allowed them sufficient time to settle in before commencing scan procedures. Where necessary, staff assisted patients while they prepared for their scan.

The service had a chaperone process in place to support people if they needed it. The department operated with a male workforce and used the resident medical officer as a chaperone who was also male. Staff informed patients that the radiographers were male and explained that a female chaperone could be arranged if preferred.

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

Staff closely monitored patients during their scans to ensure they were comfortable. Staff informed patients that they would pause the scan if requested or if the patient experienced pain, anxiety or discomfort. Staff communicated with patients throughout the procedure using the intercom system to keep them informed about the process and time remaining.

We observed staff who were calm and reassuring and who responded appropriately to patients’ questions about their scan.

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

Staff told us they felt proud to work for Hamptons Hospital and spoke positively about the hospital’s overall culture.

Staff told us they found the radiation protection supervisor RPS and other senior managers approachable and reported having good relationships with them. However, staff told us they did not have a daily point of contact to discuss routine issues or concerns.