Spire Wellesley 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

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

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

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.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. 
 

Patients told us that staff treated them with kindness and were sensitive and supportive to their needs. They described the staff as “professional”, “supportive and kind”. Patients told us they felt comfortable asking additional questions when they needed further explanations. 
 

Staff took time to interact and reassure patients undergoing treatment or procedures. Staff recognised anxious patients and took additional time to support them. For example, patients nervous about having an endoscopy were offered a pre-procedure appointment to see the environment, talk through what was going to happen and relieve anxiety. During our assessment there were no endoscopy procedures taking place, we sought assurances through patient feedback and surveys results. 
 

When a patient required onward referral, staff made sure they supported patients to access the relevant service.
Patient feedback and survey results showed high levels of satisfaction with how staff treated them, with people confirming they were treated with dignity and had sufficient privacy during their care. 
 

The Oncology services had received the Macmillan Quality Environment Mark (MQEM) in recognition of its high standard in cancer care. The award recognised that staff had gone above and beyond to create a welcoming environment for patients.
 

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.
 

Feedback from patients indicated they experienced care that recognised them as individuals. Where people had additional needs or protected characteristics, staff made reasonable adjustments to support them. Patients reported feeling listened to, reassured, and supported throughout their care.

Staff considered and acted on patients’ individual needs across the service. Staff explained how they adapted communication and care for patients with additional needs, including autistic people, people living with dementia or anxiety, and patients whose first language was not English. Interpreters were used to support understanding and communication. Staff offered patients pre-treatment visits to help familiarise people with the environment.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the personal, cultural, social and religious needs. We observed discussions with patients took place in the privacy of unit rooms, helping to maintain dignity and confidentiality.

Staff recognised that some patients may feel frightened or anxious when attending the service. We observed staff took time to answer patients’ questions, provide reassurance and support people throughout their care. Staff would use the hospitals designated prayer room or quiet spaces for patients and relatives if needed.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.
 

Staff supported patients to have choice and control over their care from their initial assessment through to discharge. Patients told us staff involved them in discussions, explained conditions and treatment options clearly, and supported them to participate in decisions about care. 
 

Staff helped patients understand the processes of their treatment or procedure including any potential risks, side effects and aftercare. 
 

Staff communicated in a clear and accessible way, allowing patients time to ask questions and understand information. Patients said they received information in a way they could understand and never felt rushed when seeking clarification.
 

Patients were able to choose appointment dates and times that suited their needs. Staff worked flexibly to accommodate work, family commitments and holidays by adjusting appointments if necessary. 
 

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.
 

Staff positioned emergency call bells next to patients to ensure they could call for help if they needed it. Patients told us staff listened and responded promptly when they experienced pain during procedures, providing timely and compassionate pain relief.
 

Staff understood how to identify and respond to deteriorating patients. They completed resuscitation training and participated in simulation-based exercises, enabling them to practise emergency response skills and decision-making in a safe environment.
 

We observed oncology staff interacting with patients in a caring, respectful and reassuring manner. Staff were attentive to patients’ comfort, wellbeing and concerns, responding promptly to requests and providing support throughout treatment.
 

Patients told us staff regularly checked on their physical and emotional wellbeing and were quick to identify changes in how they were coping. They felt staff knew them well and recognised concerns early. Patient satisfaction surveys for June 2025 to July 2026, showed consistently positive feedback about staff responsiveness, reassurance and support.
 

The oncology unit had a 24-hour telephone support line that allowed patients to report symptoms and wellbeing concerns between appointments. 
 

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.
 

Staff received annual appraisals that included meaningful discussions about career development, training needs and future goals. Unit leaders supported progression through access to training, preceptorships and opportunities to broaden experience.
 

Staff spoke positively about working for the service and were proud to be part of a team that prioritised patient care. They described a supportive culture, strong teamwork and opportunities for personal and professional development.
 

Staff described leaders as compassionate and responsive. They felt supported to discuss the emotional impact of their work and access help when needed. Staff were given support and access to counselling through the services employee assistant program. Following any incidents, staff were supported through structured debriefs and referred for additional psychological support if needed. 
 

The provider recognised and celebrated staff achievements through regular awards aligned to organisational values. The service promoted staff looking after each other, professional standards and safe working environments for all staff.  
 

The service demonstrated a strong commitment to staff wellbeing. For example, the hospital had invested in the renovation of an outside space to create a separate rest area for staff. Staff also had access to a prayer room and quiet spaces if needed.