The Priory Hospital North London

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

Our overall rating of caring at The Priory Hospital North London Acute is 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.

Staff consistently demonstrated empathy and a strong commitment to supporting patients’ needs through their attitudes and behaviours during interactions. Throughout the inspection, we observed that staff were responsive, respectful, patient, and kind when engaging with patients. They maintained regular engagement and were attentive, identifying when support was required and responding promptly.

When discussing patients, staff spoke with kindness and respect, recognising everyone’s unique needs. Staff we spoke with showed a clear understanding of their patients, including awareness of their personal, cultural, social, and religious needs.

Confidentiality was appropriately maintained at all times. No personal patient information was visible in areas accessible to other patients or visitors.

We spoke with 6 patients and 3 carers. Most patients reported that staff were kind and treated them well.

We observed that the service strived to meet people’s individual needs; however, there were some limitations.

The service recognised that the environment was not fully suitable for neurodivergent patients. For example, there was no sensory room or adjustable lighting available. Managers mitigated this by completing thorough pre-admission assessments to ensure patients’ needs could be met prior to admission and they also had a sensory box on both wards.

We did not observe information demonstrating how people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 would be welcomed and supported at the service.

The service provided a range of food options to meet patients’ dietary and cultural needs.

Patients attended weekly ward rounds, where they met with the multidisciplinary team to discuss their care and treatment.

Staff supported patients to maintain contact with their families and friends and sustain meaningful relationships. During our inspection, we observed evidence of family visits taking place.

Information about Independent Mental Health Advocacy (IMHA) services was clearly displayed through posters and leaflets within the service. Staff ensured patients could access information about their rights and how to raise concerns or make a complaint. Details relating to the Mental Health Act and complaints procedures were available on notice boards on the ward.

The hospital provided a variety of food options to meet patients’ dietary and cultural needs. Patients were able to prepare their own hot drinks and access snacks independently, without reliance on staff. There were no restrictions on when patients could access drinks and snacks.

Staff monitored changes in risks to patient safety and wellbeing, including risks patients may pose to themselves or others. We saw examples of the multidisciplinary team reviewing and updating risk assessments and care plans in response to changes in patients’ needs.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their patients, including individual needs and risk factors. For example, some patients had identified physical health needs. Appropriate care plans were in place to support these needs, including detailed guidance for staff on how to respond in the event of an incident.

Staff used de-escalation techniques to manage situations and reduce the need for physical intervention. In the past six months there had been 24 incidents on Lower Court Ward and 60 on Oak Ward where restraint was used, totalling 84 incidents across both wards. Staff reported that the service had experienced a period of higher acuity, which they felt had contributed to the increased use of restraint.

Most patients we spoke with told us they felt comfortable approaching staff with any concerns. Weekly community meetings were held to provide patients with an opportunity to raise issues; however, staff reported that attendance at these meetings was generally low.

All staff we spoke with told us they felt respected, supported, and valued by their colleagues and managers. Staff reported that senior managers were visible within the service and would attend the ward to support patient care when required.

Staff spoke positively about working at the service and expressed pride in their teams’ work. They were also able to access support for their own physical and emotional wellbeing through the wider service provider.

There were appropriate facilities available for staff. Several rooms were accessible off the ward for use during breaks. Staff had lockers to securely store personal belongings, as well as access to facilities to prepare hot and cold drinks and to store and heat food.

Most staff told us they received support from managers following involvement in distressing incidents.

Staff appraisals included career development discussions and considered opportunities for professional growth. Staff said they felt able to approach management to request additional training relevant to their roles.

The provider recognised staff achievements through awards and positive feedback. Oak Ward had recently received a ‘Team of the Month’ award, and we observed an awards ceremony taking place during our inspection to celebrate this achievement.