North Ormesby Dialysis Unit

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 is the first assessment for this Quality Statement for this unit. This key question has been rated good.

We assessed 5 quality statements for this key question. Service users were always treated with kindness, empathy, and compassion. Service users’ privacy and dignity was respected; they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. Every effort was made to take service users’ wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them. We found evidence of workforce wellbeing and support.

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.

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.

Service users told us the staff were professional, friendly, and informative and there were no problems.

Staff told us how they maintained service users’ privacy and dignity by offering screens, if needed.

Staff told us they felt very supported in their role by managers and each other.

Partners told us they had seen no issues with kindness, compassion, and dignity. They said, whenever they visited the unit, they felt welcomed and part of the team.

We observed staff interacting with service users and other staff in a calm and organised way and with dignity and respect. Whilst there were no privacy curtains around the bed stations, there were mobile screens which staff told us they would use if service users required privacy. There were two side rooms which could be used if required. Service users told us they did not mind that there were no curtains around the stations.

We reviewed the unit’s philosophy of care, which was available to view in reception, which said the unit would respect Service users’ privacy and dignity.

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.

Service users were able to have visitors to the unit once the treatment commenced. There was a small kitchen available for drinks and snacks. We observed service users had brought their own preferred drinks and snacks into the unit.

Staff told us how care was individualised to service users who they got to know over a long period of time. Staff told us who they would contact to help with interpretation when and if required.

We saw multiple leaflets with local and national support services for patients. Whilst we did not see any leaflets in another language, leaders could tell us where they would go for this support.

Service users’ health records were individualised, detailed and up to date.

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 assessed service users’ needs and preferences as part of their initial assessment, and this was reviewed at each visit.

Side rooms were available and in use when we visited. Staff and leaders told us these could be used for service users who requested privacy.

Leaders told us how they support service users with decisions around their care, treatment, and wellbeing, including changing appointment slots when they became available. This included when service users wanted to decide to stop their treatment and how they supported them with this. We saw evidence of this in service users’ health records.

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.

Service users told us they did not have to wait a long time after their allocated appointment time for treatment to start and they were disconnected from dialysis promptly once it finished.

Service users told us the staff were prompt in coming to help when they were called or when machines alarmed, which could indicate service users could be unwell.

We observed staff acting promptly when we visited to ensure service users were responded to immediately and a plan put in place to transfer to the local hospital emergency department.

We reviewed service users’ health records which identified that at the start of each treatment risk assessments were reviewed and amended as needed with actions put in place, if required, to reduce risk.

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 told us they liked working for the company and felt supported at work. Staff we spoke with told us how information was shared with them and about the opportunities for training available.

Leaders told us how they supported staff when workplace adjustments were required. They told us how they supported members of staff with shift patterns and part time work on return from long term sickness.

Leaders shared with us how they supported staff with sickness and absence. They told us sickness levels were above what they would have liked and were able to share with us, how they were supporting staff to reduce the sickness level.

Leaders told us about the staff recognition awards which the company undertakes and how they have nominated staff from the unit in the past.

91% of staff and responded to the last annual staff 2024 survey. The results were slightly below the average for the whole company. Leaders shared with us the action plan currently in place to support staff with learning, training, and culture.