Great Bridge Kidney Treatment Centre

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

The service demonstrated a clear commitment to providing person-centred care. Staff were observed to treat patients with kindness, dignity and respect, and patients provided consistently positive feedback about their experiences. Effective team working supported the delivery of compassionate and individualised care.

Staff reported feeling respected and supported within their roles and described being able to approach both local and senior management for guidance when required. Observations and staff feedback indicated that multidisciplinary team working was embedded within the service, supporting a coordinated approach to meeting patients’ needs. This meant people were treated with dignity and respect.

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

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.

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

Staff consistently demonstrated kind, compassionate and respectful care, maintaining patients’ privacy and dignity.

Feedback from patients and a relative was uniformly positive, with individuals describing staff as approachable and supportive. Patients highlighted positive relationships with staff, supported by continuity of care.

Patients provided positive feedback about their experience of care. They described staff were “very sociable” and “like a family.” Patients reported they felt comfortable raising concerns and that staff responded promptly when assistance was requested. They also described feeling settled and familiar with the environment and routine, noting consistency in their care setting and positive views about the facilities.

Observations showed staff communicated effectively throughout care delivery, involving patients in their treatment and supporting them to understand their care. Staff were also seen to provide reassurance and emotional support during treatment.

The evidence showed did not always treat patient 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.

Patients’ individual needs and preferences, including cultural, social and religious considerations, were recognised and respected. Overall, interactions between staff and patients reflected a caring, person-centred culture, contributing to a positive patient experience.

A patient told us, “I have been to a couple of services and here it is smaller, staff are chatty, and I feel like a person not a number, and the staff are brilliant”.

At the previous inspection, the service had been advised to review arrangements for patients whose first language was not English. At this inspection, the service had access to interpreter services aligned with the NHS trust, and a range of approaches were described. However, these were not applied consistently, as staff did not know where to access this, and key information, including phone numbers, leaflets was not evidenced as routinely available in other languages.

Although some materials were provided post-inspection, these were not clearly embedded within the service. There was also limited evidence of consistent alternative communication methods for patients with additional needs. This reduced assurance that all patients were supported to understand and be involved in their care and treatment.

The service had arrangements in place to support patients to access the premises independently.

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.

Patients told us they understood what to expect from their care and treatment, including how it was delivered to meet their individual needs.

Patient feedback was gathered through a structured patient perception survey, which demonstrated generally positive experiences of care. The service achieved an overall average score of 6.09 in 2025, which meant patients felt their care was overall positive, with particularly strong results in areas including information, environment and privacy and dignity.

Patients reported positive experiences of communication and felt supported during their care and treatment. These findings were consistent with observations during the inspection.

Patients described being able to make choices about aspects of their care, including scheduling and treatment preferences where appropriate.

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.

The service demonstrated that people’s needs, views and wishes were listened to and understood. Staff were observed to respond promptly to people’s needs and took appropriate action to minimise any discomfort, anxiety or distress.

The clinical area was arranged into bays, with staff positioned in each bay while patients were receiving care and treatment. This supported effective oversight of patients and enabled staff to respond promptly where support was required.

All patients had access to call bells, which were responded to promptly. Staff also attended quickly when machines alarmed, meaning patients received timely support when needed.

Clear communication within the team was observed in relation to changes in an individuals’ care needs. These were reviewed and updated where required. This was consistently observed throughout the inspection visit.

The service had completed a review in relation to patient falls and sepsis, with actions identified and implemented to improve patient safety and the early recognition and management of deterioration.

The evidence showed a good standard. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centered care.

The service demonstrated a commitment to promoting staff wellbeing and ensuring that staff were supported to deliver person-centred care.

Staff reported feeling respected and supported and stated that they were able to approach both local and senior managers for support when required.

Staff sickness was monitored and was relatively low between April 2025 and March 2026.

Through staff feedback and observations of the staff, effective team working was evident. Staff were observed to support one another, and a consistent focus was maintained on ensuring that patients’ care and treatment needs were met.