Spire Cambridge Lea Hospital

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

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

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

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.

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 treated people with kindness and respect and took steps to help everyone feel comfortable during their visit. Quiet rooms and an alternative reception area were available for those who preferred a calmer environment.

Leaders emphasised compassionate communication and person‑centred care. Staff were encouraged to write clinical notes clearly and respectfully and to consider how information would be understood by patients and families.

Training supported this approach. The Oliver McGowan learning disability and autism training, delivered face to face by facilitators with lived experience, helped staff understand how to adapt communication, reduce anxiety and support patients with sensory or routine‑based needs.

Staff routinely provided chaperones and used private spaces, such as the Lucy Cavendish rooms, to support dignity during examinations and procedures. They responded sensitively to patients with complex needs or long‑term conditions.

Learning was shared across the service. A review of a coroner’s case involving a patient with chronic pain helped staff reflect on communication, follow‑up processes and how to identify risks for vulnerable individuals.

Patients also commented on the short waiting times. They said this reduced anxiety and made their experience calmer. Carers told us the smooth flow through the service helped them feel confident that staff were organised, responsive and attentive to people’s needs.

Teams discussed all high‑risk patients during the morning safety huddles so they could plan extra support where needed. This meant patients who required closer monitoring, additional communication or personalised adjustments were identified early in the day.

Service leads designed the clinical layout to support a smooth experience for patients. Related services were located close together, such as the grouped ophthalmology rooms and the Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) treatment and consulting areas. This reduced unnecessary movement and helped ensure patients felt comfortable and supported.

Consultants preferred to see patients face to face rather than use virtual clinics. Staff said this helped patients feel listened to and supported, particularly when discussing complex conditions such as endometriosis, eye disorders or ENT problems.

Staff used the risk‑assessment process to tailor contact to individual needs. Nurses followed up flagged responses with phone calls to clarify health information, provide reassurance and make sure patients understood their planned procedure.

During weekly safety meetings, staff reviewed individual needs such as sensory sensitivities, anxiety or communication requirements, including for people with autism. This enabled reasonable adjustments to be planned in advance of surgery or clinic appointments.

Staff supported patients sensitively, including those with dementia, autism or increased anxiety. They observed when patients appeared distressed and took time to offer reassurance. Interpreting services were used appropriately, and staff did not use family members for consent discussions.

Learning from the Oliver McGowan Learning Disability and Autism training helped staff adapt their communication style and better understand sensory and processing needs. Staff described the training as powerful because facilitators shared their lived experience.

Chaperones were routinely provided in clinics, and staff adapted care where needed—for example, escalating allergy risks promptly or modifying medication plans for individual patients.

The involvement of a Children’s Hospice trustee provided staff with additional insight into compassionate governance and the needs of children and families.

Departments also shared learning widely across the organisation’s 38 hospitals following incidents. This supported safer, more personalised care beyond the local site by helping teams recognise risks and consider individual needs more effectively.

Staff acted with compassion when a colleague showed signs of distress, noticing changes in behaviour, initiating supportive conversations, and escalating concerns appropriately. Clinicians ensured Duty of Candour discussions were handled sensitively, giving people clear, open explanations about their care and allowing them to make informed choices about the next steps.

Safeguarding leads supported staff when situations were unclear, helping them balance empathy with professional boundaries so that people’s rights and wishes were central to decision‑making.

Staff monitored risks collaboratively and used daily alerts to keep everyone involved in care aware of new information, ensuring plans could be adjusted quickly in line with the person’s needs and preferences.

People were routinely offered chaperones, translation support and quiet spaces, enabling them to communicate effectively, retain control and feel comfortable during their appointments.

Staff showed care and concern when they identified vulnerability, whether in patients or colleagues. When a member of staff appeared distressed or unable to access support networks, colleagues escalated this promptly to the safeguarding lead. This reflected a caring culture where staff supported one another as well as their patients.

Duty of Candour discussions were approached sensitively. Clinicians took time to explain what had happened, ensured patients understood the information and offered opportunities for questions. This helped maintain openness and reinforced patient trust. Duty of Candour processes were built into the electronic incident system, which ensured that any incident causing harm triggered timely conversations and documentation.

Staff described how they stayed with patients during emergencies and offered reassurance throughout. Many alerts related to minor issues such as dizziness, dehydration or feeling faint. Staff remained with the patient and their family until the person was stable and comfortable. In one example, a family member who became unwell on site also received immediate support and follow‑up care. Staff described the team as calm, responsive and reassuring during such events.

Staff demonstrated a consistent commitment to recognising distress quickly and responding in ways that minimised discomfort, anxiety or confusion.

Staff told us they looked after their own wellbeing so they could continue delivering good care. They said rest, preparation between shifts and maintaining healthy routines at home helped them manage the demands of the role. Staff supported one another when workload was heavy, particularly when colleagues were returning from sickness or needed flexible working adjustments.

Staff valued the supportive culture within the department. They said the team worked hard to maintain a positive environment despite operational pressures and a fast‑paced outpatient workload. Managers were described as helpful when staff needed support, especially around flexible working or adapting shifts for those recovering from illness.

Staff adapted well to changing shift patterns and busy clinics. They looked for practical solutions to work more efficiently, such as using paper rotas on clinic trolleys to track which patients had been seen and which consultants’ staff were supporting. Some staff found it difficult to plan personal commitments because rotas were sometimes issued late, but they said managers were understanding when additional help or time out was needed.

Staff suggested improvements to make daily work easier and reduce stress. Ideas included more computer screens, touchscreen displays, electronic room layouts and digital rotas. They felt this would reduce their reliance on paper, make information easier to access in real time and help the department respond more quickly to changes in activity.

One staff member described how they managed the emotional and physical demands of the job through good sleep, preparation and teamwork. Some staff worked a variety of early and late shifts, and the team supported each other when clinics were very busy or when colleagues returned from sickness. Staff highlighted that the positive culture and supportive managers helped them maintain their wellbeing.

Overall, staff described a workplace where wellbeing was recognised, colleagues looked after each other and managers took practical steps to support staff in delivering person‑centred care.

Leadership recognised that its structure sometimes created a lonely working environment for consultants, especially in specialties where MDT discussions were limited or less frequent. This made it harder for consultants to access peer support and regular clinical dialogue, and the hospital identified the need to improve MDT integration to strengthen collaborative working.

Staff had access to senior support and felt involved in day‑to‑day decision making.