Spire South Bank 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

Patients, and where appropriate those close to them, were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of patient’s physical emotional, communication and personal care needs. Care and treatment was based on latest evidence and good practice guidance. Patient outcomes met expectations, and harm free care was the norm. Patients’ pain was quickly identified and well managed.

Staff assessed patients nutritional and hydration needs, made sure patients had sufficient to eat and drink or alternatives as needed. Staff made sure patients understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.

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 we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant patient’s outcomes were consistently good, and patient’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.

The outpatient department assessed patients' physical, psychological and social needs to ensure care and treatment were planned and delivered effectively. Staff used appropriate assessment processes to understand each patient's individual circumstances, clinical requirements and preferences before developing a plan of care.

Patients were assessed by suitably qualified clinicians who considered their presenting condition, medical history, current medications, allergies, previous treatments and any relevant risk factors. Assessments were completed in a timely manner and informed decisions about investigations, treatment options, referrals and follow-up arrangements.

We reviewed 10 patient records and found evidence that assessments were comprehensive, person-centred and appropriately documented. Records demonstrated that clinicians considered patients' individual needs, including pain management, mobility, communication requirements, mental health needs and any relevant social circumstances. Where additional needs were identified, appropriate referrals, advice or support were provided.

Patients were involved throughout the assessment process. Clinicians explained findings, discussed available options and involved patients in decisions about their care and treatment. Patients were encouraged to ask questions and share their concerns, ensuring care plans reflected their preferences and goals.

The service recognised that some patients required additional support to participate fully in assessments. Reasonable adjustments were made for patients with disabilities, communication difficulties, learning disabilities or other individual needs. This included access to interpreters, accessible information, involvement of carers or advocates where appropriate and additional time during consultations.

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.

The outpatient department delivered care and treatment that was based on current evidence, national guidance and recognised clinical standards. Staff used their professional knowledge and experience, alongside evidence-based pathways and best practice recommendations, to ensure patients received effective and appropriate care.

Clinicians assessed patients and developed treatment plans using relevant clinical guidelines, pathways and evidence-based approaches. Care decisions considered each patient's individual needs, preferences, risks and expected outcomes. Patients were involved in discussions about available treatment options, including the benefits, risks and alternatives, to support shared decision-making.

As well as doctors and nurses within the OPD, patients had access to physiotherapy and pharmacists. We saw evidence that referrals to these services were timely and appointments for private fee-paying patients were booked within 24 to 72 hours. Patients we spoke with said their nutrition and hydration needs were met. Patients we spoke to said outpatient staff helped them prepare for their procedure and their post-operative appointments supported their recovery. The physiotherapy service was in the process of developing a range of group sessions for patients to allow cohorts of patients to be seen together where appropriate.

Staff followed up-to-date policies to plan and deliver high quality care according to best practice and national guidance. All policies we looked at contained a creation and 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.

Patient activity data was used to understand demand, capacity and service utilisation. Clinical outcome information, including PROMs where applicable, provided assurance that patients' outcomes were monitored and that treatment effectiveness was reviewed. Infection data and reported safety indicators were reviewed to identify any concerns or trends requiring action.

The service usually worked well across teams and services to support patient. Staff made sure patient only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when patient 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.

Plans for discharge considered people’s individual needs, circumstances, ongoing care arrangements and expected outcomes. Discharges were planned at an early stage to ensure they were safe and appropriate for the person’s needs. This was started at the pre-procedure outpatient stage and if they needed surgery, it would be moved on to the preoperative assessment team to discuss further to set plan in place for when the patient went home.

Information was shared between teams and services to ensure continuity of care. Multidisciplinary reviews and meetings were held for some specialities, for example we saw that information at the outpatient stage would be sent to the patient’s GP.

Staff worked across health care disciplines and with other agencies when required to care for patients. During our assessment we attended a multidisciplinary meeting and observed good team working and best practice. Discharge and onward referral planning was discussed, taking patients individual needs, circumstances and expected outcomes into consideration.

The service generally 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.

Staff recognised the importance of prevention, early intervention and supporting patients to take an active role in managing their health. For example, there was advice available for patients to get and gain access to multiple health promotion services if needed.

During outpatient consultations, clinicians assessed patients' wider health needs and provided appropriate advice on lifestyle factors, prevention and self-management where relevant. Discussions included areas such as healthy eating, physical activity, smoking cessation, alcohol awareness, weight management and managing long-term conditions. Advice was personalised to each patient's circumstances and clinical needs.

Patients undergoing outpatient appointments had access to information about their condition, their treatment and how best to prepare for surgery. Staff spoke with them about how best to optimise their outcomes after surgery and how to modify their choices to ensure better health.

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.

The outpatient department monitored patient outcomes to assess the effectiveness of care and identify opportunities for improvement. Leaders and clinical teams used a range of quality measures, clinical data and patient feedback to evaluate the impact of treatments and ensure care delivered positive outcomes for patients.

Staff monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment through audit and benchmarking to compare with other similar services. The service used the findings to make improvements and achieved good outcomes for patients. The service participated in relevant national and provider led clinical audits, including, National Standards for Hospital Cleanliness audit, WHO Safer Surgery checklist (for minor procedures), consent documentation audit, chaperone audits and medical record audits.

The service also completed, clinic utilisation, DNA (did not attend), waiting times, appointment cancellation rates, complaint theme audits. The service reported relevant performance information to the Private Healthcare Information Network (PHIN). Leaders reviewed PHIN intelligence reports to understand performance measures, including patient activity, clinical outcomes, safety indicators and data quality. This supported transparency and benchmarking against wider independent healthcare services.

The provider considered health inequalities and took steps to ensure that outcomes across people with protected characteristics were in line with the wider community. Patient outcomes were considered alongside patient experience information, including Friends and Family Test results, surveys, compliments and complaints. Leaders used this information to understand whether patients felt their care was effective, whether communication was clear and whether services were meeting patient needs.

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.

Consent was obtained in accordance with legal and professional guidance. Staff understood the principles of assessing mental capacity and demonstrated knowledge of the relevant legislation. Where patients required additional support to make decisions, this was arranged appropriately, and decisions were made in the patient’s best interest when necessary.

Consent for surgery was sought by the most appropriate doctor and included discussion about the benefits, potential complications, the risks and alternative options. Patient consent was checked at various points before they went to the operating room and immediately prior to surgery. There were consent audits completed and outcomes shared with staff.

We observed staff seeking verbal consent before providing care or treatment. People were involved in decision making at all levels. Housekeeping staff asked patients what they wanted to eat and drink.