Spire Little Aston 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

We looked for evidence that patients and communities had the best possible outcomes because their needs were assessed. We checked that patient’s care, support and treatment reflected these needs and any protected equality characteristics, ensuring patient were at the centre of their care. We also looked for evidence that leaders instilled a culture of improvement, where understanding current outcomes and exploring best practice was part of their everyday work.

At our last assessment, this key question was not rated. At this assessment we rated it as Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

We have not awarded this service a score for Effective.

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

The service usually made sure patient’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

There was a reception area on admission to the hospital where patients could ask any questions such as directions to the outpatients department. Preoperative assessments took place to determine any risks of surgery (see surgery report for further details). Staff had access to patient records which contained relevant patient information.

Staff shared key information to keep patients safe when handing over their care to others. Shift changes included all necessary key information to keep patients safe. For example, a daily huddle took place as well as multidisciplinary meetings with the rest of the hospital.

Patients were advised to contact staff if they had any specific needs prior to their appointment such as access, communication, or needs. They could also contact reception on arrival if required.

The service usually planned and delivered patient’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Staff did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Staff followed up-to-date policies to plan and deliver high-quality care according to best practice and national guidance. Staff could access polices easily on the hospital intranet.

All policies contained a review date and clear references to current national guidelines. There were systems to communicate changes in guidance through meetings and management newsletters. We saw notice boards displaying up to date guidance to staff.

There were vending machines with snacks and drinks in the patients' waiting areas as well as a free coffee and tea machines. There was also drinking water available.

The service worked well across teams and services to support patients. Staff made sure patients only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when they moved between different services.

Doctors, nurses, and other healthcare professionals worked together as a team to benefit patients. They supported each other to provide good care.

Staff reported healthy working relations across staff groups including between medical and nursing teams. We saw and heard examples of effective team working which was based on mutual respect and trust.

Information was shared between teams and services to ensure continuity of care. Multidisciplinary reviews and meetings were held. Patient records showed there was input from a range of clinicians and that they shared information to ensure a consistent approach to care and treatment pathways.

Staff held regular and effective multidisciplinary meetings where required, to discuss treatment options for individual patients and improve their care. Regular daily multidisciplinary safety huddles reviewed staffing levels, patient risks, and any escalation needs.

The service supported patients to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported patients to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The service supported patients to manage their health and wellbeing so they could maximise their independence, choice and control. Consultants were available to give advice if needed.

The Spire website provided information for prospective patients, for example why someone may need surgery, how surgery works, alternative treatments and why a specific treatment may be right for the patient. Physiotherapists offered an outpatient's service for patients.

Staff supported patients’ to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. For example, there was information on health in the waiting areas as well as support numbers if needed.

The service monitored patient’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. Staff ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of patient themselves.

Staff monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment through audit and benchmarking to compare with other similar services.

The hospital participated in national audits and registries including The National Joint registry (NJR) and Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (see surgery report for more details).

Leaders told us how continuous improvement was supported through quarterly self-assessments, governance committee oversight. It also participated in the Spire’s Excellence Care Delivery programme. Spire Little Aston did not participate in research or clinical trials.

They also supported continuous improvement through quarterly self-assessment and governance committee oversight. The hospital had a NJR quality date scheme gold award, Venous Thrombo Embolism Exemplar. Additionally, they had a Silver Health & Safety Award and a 5-star Environmental Health Rating.

The service told patient about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff supported patients to make informed decisions about their care and treatment. They followed national guidance to gain patients’ consent. Staff knew how to support patients who lacked capacity to make their own decisions or were experiencing mental ill health.

Staff understood how and when to assess whether a patient had the capacity to make decisions about their care. Staff followed the services policies related to consent, mental capacity, deprivation of liberty and restrictive practice, as relevant.

Staff gained consent from patients for their care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance. There was a consent to investigation and treatment policy which included information on mental capacity and relevant forms such as best interest meeting record forms. People were involved in decision making at all levels.

Interpreters were available to support patients to give informed consent if needed, including for British Sign Language, and face to face interpreting when necessary