Rivers Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has changed to good.

We looked for evidence that people and communities were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of people and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that people could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service was exceptional at making sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The paediatric lead nurse led a team of registered children's nurses who supported children and young people throughout their surgical pathway. Staff ensured children, young people, and their parents or guardians received support before, during and after treatment.

Staff were able to provide examples of how they delivered individualised care that reflected each patient’s needs and preferences. This included provided extra support with those with additional needs. We saw examples of bespoke communication booklets created by staff based on the specific needs of the patient following information provided at preassessment.

Staff embedded reflective practice into their daily work to improve patient experience, particularly when discussing sensitive issues such as weight management with growing children or risky behaviours of young people and their families.

A multidisciplinary approach to care and treatment helped ensure patients' preferences were communicated effectively across the hospital. This supported continuity of care when children and young people moved between services, such as surgery and outpatient departments. We saw feedback from parents about the service going the extra mile to meet the individual needs of their children this included addressing anxiety and making them feel safe.

Staff understood the anxiety of children in the lead up to surgical procedures and had an electric toy car that could be used to go to surgery.

Staff were able to access information leaflets in a range of languages to meet patient’s needs, however this was not usually needed.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff completed holistic assessments of post-operative young patients during wound care. They reviewed how patients were coping at home and ensured they had adequate support. Staff signposted people to external sources where they needed more support. Staff also escalated any concerns over patient’s diet or pain. They promoted education for all areas of care and involved their family when required.

The service communicated with GPs after discharge, providing details of treatments, including follow up care and medication provided.

Patient information, such as medical records, were stored in line with data protection and legislation requirements.

Please refer to surgery, medical care, outpatients and diagnostics and imaging reports for more information.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff completed holistic assessments of post-operative young patients during wound care. They reviewed how patients were coping at home and ensured they had adequate support. Staff signposted people to external sources where they needed more support. Staff also escalated any concerns over patient’s diet or pain. They promoted education for all areas of care and involved their family when required.

The service communicated with GPs after discharge, providing details of treatments, including follow up care and medication provided.

Patient information, such as medical records, were stored in line with data protection and legislation requirements.

Please refer to surgery, medical care, outpatients and diagnostics and imaging reports for more information.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service had received 1 complaint from April 2024 to April 2025. All staff we spoke with knew how to respond to a complaint and of their role within the service’s complaints process.

The service performed consistently high in children and young people specific surveys. The survey included comprehensive questions of experience throughout the patient pathway and provided an opportunity to reflect their care and treatment.

Children and young people and their families we spoke with knew how to complain or raise concerns. The service provided information throughout the child or young person’s care journey.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Patients could book their appointment online, visit or ring the service, enabling them to choose an appointment time that suited their needs. Patients confirmed availability of appointments at times that suited them.

We saw records that clinics ran to schedule. Staff told us if there were delays, they would speak to patients and keep them informed.

The service ensured people had timely access to the care, treatment and support they required. Referrals for children and young people were managed through the established booking process and preassessment. All younger people referred for surgery were assessed for suitability prior to treatment. These assessments were completed by a Registered Children’s Nurse (RSCN)

The premises were accessible, with wheelchair‑accessible lifts and suitable toilet facilities for people with disabilities.

Patients and their families could access the service easily through a referral process with their GP or directly. The service monitored those who did not attend their appointments and took action to follow up repeated absences.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The service monitored patient access and outcomes to identify potential health inequalities. This information was used to inform service planning a delivery. There were systems and processes for gathering feedback which enabled collection of information about equity of patient's experiences and outcomes.

Staff we spoke with said they had received training on equality, diversity and human rights.

We saw information which showed the service made reasonable adjustments for patients when needed. For example we saw guidelines for service and assistance dogs within the hospital, interpreters, signers, Braille buttons in lifts, signage in large print, and a hearing loop.

All patients said they were fully involved in all decisions about their care, respecting individual preferences, and adapting communication and approach to meet their needs, including cultural, emotional, and accessibility requirements. Feedback was actively encouraged and used to continuously improve the service.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff provided children, young people and their parents or guardians with clear information about ongoing care and treatment needs. Where young people underwent surgery, discharge information included details of ongoing treatment and medicines to be taken at home.