- Independent hospital
St Anthony's Hospital
Assessment report published 7 September 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 16 June to 17 June 2026. St Anthony’s Hospital provides medical care, services for children and young people, critical care, surgical, and outpatient services to both private and NHS-funded patients.
This assessment looked at critical care, surgical, and outpatient services, which we rated as good. The rating of St Anthony’s Hospital remains good.
Our assessment of the Outpatients department found a positive culture of safety, openness and learning. Staff understood their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and reported incidents appropriately. Leaders investigated incidents and shared learning to support improvement. The environment was clean, and infection prevention and control risks were well managed. Staff assessed patients promptly, involved them in decisions about their care and treatment, and delivered care in line with current evidence and best practice guidance. Patients were treated with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. Recent leadership changes had been implemented, including the appointment of a new Head of Outpatient Services. Leaders were visible, approachable and supportive, demonstrated the skills and capabilities required for their roles, and worked collaboratively with partners to support the sustainability and ongoing development of the service.
Outpatient department leaders valued and empowered staff and encouraged opportunities for professional development. However, not all outpatient department staff were fully up to date with mandatory training requirements. Although some areas showed signs of wear and tear, the hospital was undertaking a refurbishment programme to improve the environment.
Our assessment of surgery services found a positive learning culture where staff and patients could raise concerns. Patients were protected from abuse and avoidable harm because staff understood local safeguarding arrangements and safe systems of working. There were enough staff with the appropriate skills, qualifications and experience across surgical services to provide safe and effective care and treatment. Staff reviewed assessments regularly, taking account of patients' physical, emotional, communication and personal care needs. Care and treatment were delivered in line with current evidence and good practice guidance. Staff identified and managed patients' pain effectively. The service monitored and worked to improve access to care. Leaders and staff understood the service's vision, aims and objectives and how these aligned with the wider organisational strategy. The culture was characterised by openness, speaking up, listening, learning and trust. However, leadership arrangements had been unstable during the past 18 months, which affected the consistency of leadership oversight and strategic direction. In addition, governance systems were not always effective in ensuring that statutory notifications relating to incidents and events were submitted to the Commission without delay. Not all staff were up to date with their required training modules. We found 2 breaches of the regulation within surgical services on mandatory training and governance.
During the assessment of the 8-bedded Critical care service, we found the service provided high-quality, person-centred care that was tailored to patients' individual needs, beliefs and preferences. Care was consultant-led and delivered by a multidisciplinary team.
Staff demonstrated a good understanding of safeguarding procedures and risk management, and staffing levels were sufficient to meet the requirements for level 2 and level 3 care. Patients were treated with dignity, compassion and respect, and feedback from patients was positive about the care they received.
Although there had been changes in the senior leaders. The leadership teams had clear oversight of quality and performance through established governance processes, and the service routinely monitored and acted on quality and safety information to drive improvements. Staff understood both the unit's and the hospital’s vision and were committed to delivering safe and effective care. However, some staff reported they did not always feel listened to or involved in decision-making.