The Winterbourne Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

This means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

We now rate this key question under our Assessment Framework methodology. This key question has been rated good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

During the onsite inspection we reviewed 10 patient records. This showed patients’ needs and conditions were assessed and treatment options were discussed with patients.

Patients who underwent minor procedures in the outpatient department completed a health questionnaire. This was reviewed by clinicians and discussed with the patient to ensure the patient was medically fit enough to have the procedure.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Staff had access to policies and procedures that were in line with national guidance. The sample of policies and procedures provided by the service demonstrated they were kept under review and referenced relevant national guidance and practice. Staff were updated about changes to guidance in policies and processes in several ways, including electronic formats and in meetings.

Staff completed competency training and assessments. This ensured they had the knowledge and competencies to provide care in line with national guidelines for specific procedures carried out the department. This included, but was not exclusive to, chaperoning, cystoscopy (a procedure used to look inside the bladder to diagnose or treat conditions) and venepuncture (a procedure in which a needle is used to take blood from a vein).

The evidence showed a good standard. The service worked well across teams and services to support people.

Staff held regular and effective multidisciplinary meetings to discuss care improvement. Records of meetings showed nurses and healthcare care assistants attended the meetings.

Staff reported and we observed effective working relationships and communication with consultant medical staff in the department.

Staff worked with staff from other departments in the hospital. Physiotherapy staff spoke about good working relationship between the outpatient service and themselves. They liaised with outpatient staff (nurses and consultants) if they had concerns about the health of patients attending the outpatient department.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff assessed each patient’s health at every appointment. Staff gave patients support and advice about how to lead healthier lives, including wound healing advice.

Most patients were normally on a pathway associated with a different department and most of their health promotion was given during pre-operative assessments. Health promotion advice was also available for consultants to give to patients specific to their speciality.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Managers and staff completed audits to monitor and check improvements over time. This included, but was not exclusive to, audits of the World Health Organisation (WHO) surgical check list for minor procedures carried out in the department, and infection prevention and control audits. Managers used information from audits to improve care and treatment.

Most patients were normally on a pathway associated with a different department. Their treatment outcomes were monitored in other areas, most often by surgery.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff had access to a consent policy. The policy was kept under review by the provider and referenced relevant legalisation and national guidance. There was clear guidance for staff about when and how to obtain consent, how to manage consent with for a patient who lacked capacity to give informed consent about that a specific decision. There was also clear guidance for self-paying patients stating costs of treatment should be included in the consent process.

Staff gained consent from patients for their care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance. Staff made sure patients consented to treatment based on all the information available. Staff now clearly recorded consent in the patients ‘records.

Consent audits for January 2025 to April 2025 demonstrated staff were 100% compliant with following the consent process.