The Hampshire Clinic

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment, the rating has remained 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.

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 respect, explained processes, and gave patients enough time to ask questions. When patients were confused or uncertain about their care or treatment, staff treated them with dignity and provided reassurance. Patients said staff took the time to make them feel listened to. We observed patients being treated with kindness and compassion during their appointments.

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.

Staff routinely reviewed information about specific needs to make improvements to care planning. Patients were encouraged to tell staff about their needs, throughout the booking process prior to their appointment, by posters in corridors and through patient passports. The service offered a range of patient passports to support personalisation of care, such as ‘This is me’ booklets from the Alzheimer’s society. Various care plans and documents recorded reasonable adjustments and advance decision making in highlighted red alerts. Red alerts are a visual cue to help staff identify important patient information quickly.

Patients had access to spiritual support and a multi faith room if they needed it.

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.

All patients who received consultations requiring intimate care were supported with a chaperone service. The service followed best practice guidelines to offer and provide chaperones for all intimate examinations or procedures. Leaders had assessed the risk to patients for a range of protected characteristics. The service recognised that intimacy could be interpreted differently by different patient groups. Staff understood the need to document the offer of the chaperone service and later refusal or acceptance.

Leaders identified which clinics were more likely to require the chaperone service and staffed this to the required level. Chaperone staffing was audited quarterly. In April 2025, a chaperone was provided 56% of the time. Leaders made improvements to their chaperone register and staffing which led to 98% compliance in August 2025. There were no incidents or complaints related to chaperones or intimate examinations during this time.

Patients told us they were involved in decisions about their treatment and wellbeing. They felt informed about treatment options and were supported to make a decision that was right for them. One patient was encouraged to take their time when preparing for treatment and was reassured they could change their mind at any point.

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 identified and responded to changing risks to patients. Clinical rooms and toilets contained call systems for help, triggered by pull chord or alert buttons. Reception staff looked after waiting areas and were able to call for help if patients became unwell.

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-centred care.

Staff felt positive about working for the service and their team. Staff had access to support for their own physical and emotional health needs through several standard services. This included 24/7 mental health counselling, an employee assistance programme, gym membership, menopause support, and health assessments provided by the hospital. As part of a provider led initiative, the service had introduced a mental health first aider available on site. The mental health first aider attended quarterly provider led meetings, to share learning and stay up to date.

The service’s staff sickness and absence rate was lower than other areas of the hospital at 1.6%, between June to August 2025. Many staff had worked at the service for more than 10 years and staff turnover was low. When new staff joined the service, they integrated well into teams.

Outpatients staff were encouraged to develop and progress. Staff appraisals included conversations about career development and how the service could support them. Healthcare assistants had been supported to access training to become registered nurses.

The service ran an initiative where staff recognised colleague contributions by nominating them on the ‘compassion tree.’ Staff received a small bonus as part of this.

Leaders managed staff lone working risk well. The service regularly reviewed risk assessments for lone working in outpatients' and connected areas and involved staff in mitigating risk. There had been no incidents related to lone working.