The Westbourne Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that patients and communities were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of patients and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that patients could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

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

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

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

The service made sure patients were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with patients, how to respond to any relevant changes in patient’s needs.

Patients who self-referred to the service were actively involved in planning their care and treatment from the outset. This included choosing the consultant they wished to see and selecting a surgery date that met their individual needs and preferences. Consultations were person-centred and focused on patients’ goals, expectations and individual circumstances. Consultants explored patients’ motivations for treatment and desired outcomes to ensure care and treatment plans were tailored to their needs.

Patients were encouraged to ask questions and were given sufficient time and information to make informed decisions about their care. Consultants discussed all available treatment options, including the associated risks, benefits and professional recommendations, enabling patients to participate in shared decision-making.

The service provided access to clinical advice when required. Patients received a post-operative telephone call from a nurse and a follow-up email, which they could use to contact the service with any questions or concerns. Reasonable adjustments could be made to meet individual needs and preferences. Aftercare was planned and delivered according to each patient's individual requirements, with no limit on the number of follow-up appointments available. Patients were reviewed regularly by their consultant throughout their recovery, ensuring continuity of care and ongoing support.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of patients and their local communities. Care was planned and delivered to meet the needs of the local population and was joined-up, flexible and supported choice, access and continuity of care.

Leaders developed their understanding of local needs through engagement with healthcare professionals, community partners and people with lived experience. Feedback was used to inform service development and improve accessibility and inclusion. This included participation in Disability and Neurodiversity People Resource Groups, partnership working with community organisations and initiatives to improve access and patient experience. Leaders also provided educational events for GP practice medical secretaries to support effective referrals and facilitate timely access to care.

The service had processes in place to identify and support patients requiring additional assistance, ongoing monitoring or specialist intervention. Staff worked collaboratively with other healthcare providers to ensure appropriate referrals were made and patients received timely access to the care and treatment they needed.

The service took a proactive approach to improving the health and wellbeing of the local population through specialist-led educational events. These sessions covered common conditions, including foot health and eye health, and provided accessible information about symptoms, treatment options, preventative measures and available support services. Leaders used feedback from community engagement activities and patient reference groups to shape the programme, helping to improve health literacy, encourage earlier access to appropriate care and strengthen links with the communities they served.

Managers monitored appointment attendance and followed up patients who did not attend appointments to rearrange care where appropriate. This helped minimise delays in treatment and supported continuity of care. Patient non-attendance (DNA) was monitored through incident reporting and governance processes, with trends reviewed quarterly and action taken where necessary to support access to care and ongoing service improvement.

The service usually supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Patients had access to a wide range of information to support informed decision-making, including leaflets on surgical procedures, investigations, and health promotion. Staff demonstrated how information could be provided in alternative languages to meet the needs of the local population and individual patients. The service website provided comprehensive information to support informed choice, and patients received written information relevant to their procedure throughout their treatment journey. The service had clear arrangements in place for maintaining the accuracy of patient information, with a designated staff member responsible for ensuring materials remained up to date and accessible.

The service made it easy for patients to share feedback, raise concerns and be involved in decisions about their care. Leaders told us patients could provide feedback through a range of accessible methods and information about how to raise concerns or complaints was readily available. Staff encouraged feedback and demonstrated an open and person-centred approach when responding to concerns.

Complaints and concerns were investigated and responded to in line with local policy. Leaders used feedback, complaints and compliments to identify learning and drive service improvements.

We requested records relating to the three most recent serious incidents. The provider was only able to provide one serious incident, which occurred in 2023, as no further serious incidents occurred since that time. We reviewed the documentation and found the incident had been appropriately investigated, with learning identified and shared across the service.

We also reviewed 24 surgery-related incidents reported between 1 December 2025 and 20 June 2026. All were categorised as no or low harm, with the majority relating to cancelled operations. Records showed incidents were reviewed and monitored through governance processes to identify themes, trends and opportunities for improvement.

The service usually made sure that patients could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Patients could access the service when they needed to and received the right care promptly. Waiting times from referral to treatment and arrangements to admit, treat and discharge patients were in line with national standards.

Managers worked to keep the number of cancellations to a minimum. When patients had their appointments or procedures cancelled at short notice, managers ensured these were rearranged as soon as possible and within appropriate timescales.

Patients were given clear information about how to access advice and support following treatment. This included contact details for the provider, including a telephone number and email address for queries or concerns, and information on contacting the affiliated hospital out of hours if urgent advice or assistance was required.

Managers and staff worked to ensure patients did not stay longer than necessary. Discharge planning was undertaken in a timely way and staff liaised effectively with GPs and community services to support safe and coordinated discharge arrangements.

Staff and leaders listened to information about patients who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The service monitored patient experience and used feedback and governance processes to identify opportunities to improve accessibility and inclusivity.

We saw evidence that patient feedback about difficulties locating the service had been reviewed, with actions taken to improve signage and directions.

People who did not speak English as their first language could access the service. Staff had access to telephone interpretation services and could arrange additional communication support where required.

The service considered the needs of people with disabilities and those requiring reasonable adjustments. We saw evidence that a wheelchair had been purchased to improve access for patients with mobility needs and that a visual fire alarm beacon had been installed to support patients with hearing impairments.

Staff recognised and responded to individual needs. Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans were in place where required, and health passports were promoted to support staff understanding of patients' communication and support needs.

Patients were usually supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

The service had arrangements to support patients throughout their recovery and ongoing aftercare. Patients were able to access follow-up appointments with their surgeon to discuss their progress, address any concerns and review the outcomes of their procedure. Where clinically appropriate, revision surgery was available to support patients whose outcomes required further assessment or improvement.

Patients told us they were provided with information about their recovery and knew how to contact the service if they required advice or support following their procedure. Staff explained that ongoing follow-up was available to ensure patients' needs continued to be monitored and responded to appropriately.

Discharge processes were well organised. Patients were provided with a discharge summary to take home and a copy was sent to their GP to support continuity of care. Follow-up appointments were arranged prior to discharge to ensure patients had access to appropriate ongoing review and support.