The Priory Hospital

Updated 1 September 2025

The Priory Hospital is operated by Circle Health Group Limited. The hospital provides a range of services which include medicine, surgery, critical care outpatients and diagnostic imaging. The hospital has 65 inpatient beds across Dudley, Aston, ITU and Highbury wards. Facilities include 5 operating theatres, a 6-bedded level 3 intensive treatment unit, a minor operations room, a dedicated oncology centre, cardiac catheterisation lab, and X-ray, outpatient, and diagnostic facilities. The hospital saw both private and NHS patients.

We previously inspected this location using our comprehensive inspection methodology in May and July 2019. We rated them as requires improvement. We conducted a risk-based unannounced on-site assessment of outpatients and surgical services on the 28 and 29 January 2025. We assessed against safe, effective, caring, responding and well-led key questions. We found surgery and outpatients had both improved and were now rated good. However, the overall location rating remained as requires improvement. The location rating remained as requires improvement due to only 2 out of 5 assessment service groups (ASGs) being reviewed during our visit. The historic ratings for the remaining 3 ASGs have been included to form our judgement during this assessment.

Updated 19 November 2024

We carried out this assessment due to it being an aged rating. We assessed 33 quality statements across safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

This will be the services first report for the outpatient’s department, the overall rating for this service was good and this was an improvement from our last inspection.

During this assessment we spoke with 10 patients and reviewed 12 patient records, and we also observed 15 clinics with patients consent.

We spoke with 14 staff members this included ward manager, sisters, health care assistant’s, doctors/consultants, house keepers and nurses.

The service had a positive learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. People were involved in assessments of their needs, which followed evidence-based care. Staff were kind, caring and compassionate. People could access the service and received care and treatment. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable, and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles.

Updated 19 November 2024

We carried out this assessment due to it being an aged rating. We assessed 33 quality statements across safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led. As part of our assessment, we visited surgical wards, theatres, and the pre-assessment unit.

>

We looked at 9 patient records, spoke with 6 patients and 31 members of staff including the senior leadership team, theatre manager, ward manager, scrub nurses, anaesthetists, consultants, healthcare assistants, a recovery nurse, pre-operative assessment lead and staff nurses.

>

The service was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment (Regulation 12) and good governance (Regulation 17). Improvements were found at this assessment and the service was no longer in breach of these regulations.

>

>

There was a good safety culture and patients were cared for in a safe environment. Staff delivered good care and treatment following evidence-based practice and people had good outcomes. Staff were kind, caring and compassionate. People could access the service when they needed it and received the right care promptly. Leaders operated effective governance processes and used systems to manage performance effectively.

Updated 15 January 2020

Medical care services were a small proportion of hospital activity. The main service was surgery. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the surgery section.

We rated this service as requires improvement as it required improvement in Effective, responsive and well-led. However, we found it was good in safe and caring.

Updated 15 January 2020

Critical care services were a small proportion hospital activity. The main service was surgery. Where arrangements with the same we have reported findings in the surgery section. We rated the service as good because it was safe, effective, responsive and well led. Caring was not rated because we could not speak to enough patients or relatives.

Updated 15 January 2020

Diagnostic imaging services were a small proportion of hospital activity. The main service was surgery. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the surgery section.

We rated this service as requires improvement because it was good for caring and responsive, although the safety and leadership requires improvement.

Updated 17 January 2017

We rated this this service as Requires Improvement overall.

We rated safe as Inadequate because;

• The progress of incidents could not be easily followed, we saw a serious incident that had not been investigated and the affected patients had not been notified.

• Details on all patient consultation were not kept onsite.

• The ‘5 steps to safer surgery’ checklist was not embedded within Diagnostic imaging and did not take place in the outpatient department.

• The capital replacement programme for Diagnostic imaging was inadequate and radiology equipment was past its replacement date.

• Radiation doses delivered exceed the national dose reference levels for under 50’s and the gamma camera was placed on the risk register seven years ago.

We have inspected but not rated this service for effective.

• We found that the referral and justification for exposure to medical exposure of radiation was unclear. Out of date protocol was still in circulation the diagnostic imaging department but discrepancy rates were less than the national target.

We have rated responsive and well led as requires improvement;

• Computed Tomography CT cardiac scans for the

• The waiting times in diagnostic imaging were not communicated with patients.

• We were not assured that appropriate governance systems were in place to track incidents reported by staff.

• Feedback from the provider’s corporate diagnostic imaging lead to the radiology manager regarding equipment replacement was poor. The equipment in the department was in urgent need of replacement with no vision of how BMI will be addressing the issues.

• The hospital risk register did not reflect the risks occurring in diagnostic imaging.

  However we did see some good practice:

• However we also saw that departments were clean. Adequate staffing levels ensured patient safety and medicine prescriptions were stored safely.

• Multi-disciplinary team working was seen throughout the hospital and staff appraisals were up to date. Extended working hours were evident to accommodate patient need.

• We have rated this service as good for caring. We observed kind, compassionate care, all patients we spoke to recommended the service. Patients were supported through their treatments.

• We also saw that learning from complaints was evident in the physiotherapy department.

• The provider was meeting it’s referral to treatment targets and patients were provided with suitable appointments to reflect their needs.

• Staff were familiar with the vision and strategy for the service.

• Leadership was visible.

• Innovative practice was evident in physiotherapy and diagnostic imaging departments.