SpaMedica Portsmouth

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 service. This key question has been rated outstanding. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

This service scored 90 (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 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy, and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We saw that staff showed kindness and compassion to all patients. Their attitudes and behaviours when interacting with patients showed that they were discreet, respectful and responsive, providing patients with help, emotional support and advice at the time they needed it.

Staff supported patients to understand and manage their care, treatment or condition. We saw staff taking time to sit with patients and explain their treatment and what would be happening, giving patients opportunities to ask questions if needed. Online patient feedback from a patient who had treatment on both eyes said how staff were friendly and helpful and spoke of a positive experience. Another said ‘All the staff were super friendly, reassuring and made me feel at ease. My wife was able to be with me through all but the actual procedure, which was excellent as she was able to remember anything they told me or ask the right questions’.

Porters moved between areas ensuring that patients and their loved ones were supported and if they required any support. We heard from porters how if a patient looked distressed, they would sit with them to reassure them in the first instance. They would also advise nursing staff so that they were aware the patient required some additional assurance. Patients left overwhelmingly positive feedback such as ‘Excellent service, everyone friendly, very reassuring staff’ and thanked staff for their kindness and consideration. We saw patient feedback saying ‘Had my first appointment extremely quickly and within 10 days had my operation. Every single member of staff was extremely friendly courteous and made me feel very comfortable as I was terrified of having my eye done whilst awake’. Another patient said they had been anxious but were put at ease by staff. They also said how staff were ‘kind as well as professional’.

We saw how staff maintained the confidentiality of patient information. All confidential conversations were held in private areas so that they could not be overheard by others.

Patients said staff treated them well and behaved appropriately towards them. We reviewed patient feedback for the service which showed that patients rated their experience exclusively either very good or good. Patients left overwhelmingly positive feedback such as ‘Excellent service, everyone friendly, very reassuring staff’ and thanked staff for their kindness and consideration.

Staff told us they could raise concerns about disrespectful, discriminatory or abusive behaviour or attitudes towards patients without fear of the consequences. We heard how they would feel comfortable raising any concerns about behaviour toward patients with their managers and leaders.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The service took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The service made adjustments for all patients by ensuring unrestricted access to premises and by meeting patients’ specific communication needs. The service was fully accessible to wheelchair users and patients whose mobility may be restricted. Signage throughout was in large font and clear. Porters staff escorted patients around the service to support wayfinding and orientation.

Staff assessed and met patients’ needs for food and drink and for specialist nutrition and hydration. The service had hot and cold drinks available and biscuits for patients’, post-surgery. If there were long delays to appointments or surgery, the staff provided patients with food. There were a range of snacks for patients with dietary restrictions such as coeliac disease and lactose intolerance.

Staff understood the individual needs of patients, including their personal, cultural, social and religious needs. Staff told us how space could be offered if patients wished to practice their religious beliefs privately and that appointments were offered to reflect all needs.

Staff directed patients to other services when appropriate and, if required, supported them to access those services. The service offered a sight support services for all patients. This was to support with emotional and practical support to patients living with sight loss or reduced vision. Sight support officers could provide emotional support, direct patients toward financial advice services, signpost to charities, and refer onwards to other organisations. This was service offered across the provider network and the Sight Support Officers were qualified Eye Clinic Liaison Officers (ECLOs) accredited by a London based further education provider.

Patients’ communication needs were met to enable them to engage in their care, treatment and support to maximise their experience and outcomes. There was information guides tailored specifically for patients who lived alone on taking care of themselves. We also saw that there were visual guides in picture format to support patients with additional needs to understand the patient journey.

The provider level infection prevention policy considered the impact of assistance dogs when their handlers underwent surgery. Then policy outlined the patient groups that may require an assistance dog, how to maintain IPC standards and restricted areas. This meant staff had clear and informative guidance so that patients who had assistance dogs could attend to support patients without restrictions.

We saw evidence that showed how the service booked interpreters for patients who required interpretation. Staff said they would not accept a friend or relative acting as a translator due to the associated risks.

There was provider level work underway at the time of inspection to ensure recent changes in patient centred advice regarding animal containing or derived medicines could be determined. This was to ensure all patient cultural and religious beliefs could be observed with regard to medicines.

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.

Patients were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing. We spoke with patients about the information they had about their treatment, and they told us it was fully able to inform their decisions. Patients told us they were able to ask questions or raise concerns at any point in their care.

The provider website had a dedicated area that advised family members and loved ones of patients on how they could support them. This included resources for information, support, and advise on how to choose the right provider for their care, there was also advice on post operative care. The site advised family and loved ones on precautions regarding driving for patients but also stated ‘Don’t worry if you can’t get time off work or don’t have access to transport, though, because we also offer a free transport service for patients. This meant families were better informed to support patients with their treatment and to make decisions about their care.

Patients were supported to understand their rights by using different ways to communicate. Their understanding was reviewed throughout their care and treatment.

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 were alert to patient’s needs and took the time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs. All patients had a pre-operative assessment where the nurses discussed immediate needs. Where a patient had particular needs, these were accommodated.

Staff could quickly recognise when people needed urgent help or support and used appropriate tools and technology to assist. There were emergency buzzers in each patient area and CCTV throughout the service areas. This allowed staff to see patients when they were not with them and act promptly if there was urgent assistance needed.

We saw that all areas contained ‘what 3 words’ location tags to support emergency services in locating them. Staff were advised to call emergency services using mobile phones as internal phone lines operated through a centralised switchboard in another region.

We scored the service as 4. The evidence showed an exceptional standard. The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centered care.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued. We heard how they enjoyed their jobs and were well supported to give good patient care and experience. There was a culture of kindness and respect between colleagues. All conversations we observed were positive and warm, with staff checking on each other.

Staff felt positive and proud about working for the provider and their team. We heard from staff how they enjoyed working for the service and were proud of the care they provided. In the most recent annual employee survey, 100% of staff felt patients would rate the service we deliver as ‘excellent’. Additionally, 94% of staff said they would feel proud to tell people they worked at the service and would recommend it to family and friends. There were a range of policies to support staff’ personal health and wellbeing including eyesight testing, health surveillance and menopause.

All staff had access to an app which gave access to a range of services such as core and optional benefits, employee discounts and Wellbeing resources. The provider recognised staff success within the service, there was an “appreciation station” within the provider app, where there were a range of cards, and e-cards, which staff and leaders could send. Staff had access to a range of wellbeing resources such as mental health first aiders, wellbeing seminars, and one to one counselling. Mental Health First Aiders are trained to provide initial support to someone experiencing a mental health issue or crisis, much like physical first aid.

Staff could also access support for their own physical and emotional health needs through an occupational health service. There were also staff support groups such as Menopause Friends.

Staff told us they felt supported by their managers and that there was an ‘open door policy’ if they wanted to discuss any concerns or personal difficulties. A staff member told us ‘My manager is brilliant, they always make time to support me and if I need help, I can ask’.

The company paid for staff to have lunch “SpaMedica Snacks” together every 3 months to thank them for their achievements. We saw a poster which told staff when this would happen in advance.

There were quarterly local staff forums to support conversations with leaders to staff. Staff were encouraged to submit questions to these. We reviewed the most recent minutes for these and saw that they demonstrated open and honest conversations between senior leaders and staff.