Practice Plus Group Hospital - Barlborough

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 consistently provided care that was kind, compassionate and respectful, with people treated as individuals and supported in a way that recognised what mattered most to them. Staff worked with patients to understand and manage risks while maintaining dignity, supporting independence and promoting emotional wellbeing. When people expressed anxiety, distress or concerns, staff responded with sensitivity and professionalism, protecting patients’ rights and reducing distress.

We looked for evidence that patients were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion and that their privacy and dignity were always respected. We asked patients about their experiences of care, whether they felt listened to and involved, and whether their wishes, preferences and choices were taken seriously. We also looked for evidence that staff adapted care in response to individual needs, protected characteristics and changing circumstances, to achieve positive experiences and outcomes.

At our last inspection, we rated this key question as outstanding. At this inspection, the rating has remained outstanding because caring practice was consistently exceptional. Patients experienced compassionate, personalised care, staff treated people with warmth and respect, and a strong, positive workplace culture enabled staff to deliver highly person‑centred care. Emotional support, dignity, individual choice and responsiveness to need were embedded in everyday practice across the service.

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.

We scored the service as 4. Staff were exceptional at treating patients with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected patients’ privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity and took account of their individual needs. Patients told us staff treated them well, and many described the care as “excellent”.

Staff introduced themselves to patients and explained their role. They took time to interact with patients and those close to them in a respectful and considerate way.

Staff were attentive to patients who were anxious or needed reassurance. In the anaesthetic room, we observed a staff responded calmly to patients’ anxieties about their procedure and took steps to reduce stress in the environment. The staff demonstrated warm and compassionate care, in supporting a patient who appeared frightened about their operation and has provided continuous reassurance.

Staff also responded sensitively when patients expressed concerns about going home. For example, we heard an incident where a patient felt worried about being discharged home alone after their procedure. Staff arranged for the patient to be admitted to the ward overnight, giving them time to plan for support or to feel ready for discharge. This demonstrated flexible, compassionate care based on individual needs and circumstances.

During a nursing huddle, staff discussed a patient who had needed reassurance overnight, showing awareness of individual needs and emotional wellbeing.

Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. We observed privacy curtains at each bed space, which staff and patients used appropriately. One patient told us, “Yes, curtains were drawn when they examined me and any consultations were done confidentially.” When patients were moved from theatre to the ward, they were fully covered with sheets and blankets. In theatres, patients were covered as far as possible and were not unduly exposed. On the wards and when moving around the hospital, patients were supported to remain dressed or appropriately covered.

Staff considered individual communication needs. During our inspection, we observed a patient who did not speak English being offered a two‑bedded room so a relative could stay with them. This supported day‑to‑day communication, such as meal choices and whether the patient was in pain. Staff also extended care to the relative, checking whether they needed anything. Leaders told us the service identified patients who might benefit from having a relative with them before admission and arranged suitable accommodation where possible.

Confidentiality was maintained. Staff followed policy to keep patient care and treatment information confidential. Paper patient records were stored securely in a locked trolley.

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

Staff understood and respected the personal, cultural, social and religious needs of patients, and adapted care to meet individual preferences. During a ward round, we observed the multidisciplinary team involve the patient directly in the discussion and demonstrate good bedside rapport. Staff spoke to patients rather than about them, ensuring people were active participants in their care.

The service ensured staff had resources to understand and respond to the needs of people with cognitive impairment or mental health needs. A mental health awareness and dementia resource folder was available to help staff better understand individual needs. The ward also had a dedicated dementia suite, and dementia‑friendly adaptations were in place, including red toilet seats, pictorial signage and a dementia clock. Leaders told us staff used “This is Me” information to guide personalised care, and a dementia box containing familiar items and memorabilia was available to support orientation and comfort. Relatives were able to stay with patients when this supported their wellbeing, and additional healthcare assistants were allocated to provide one‑to‑one support when required.

Staff anticipated additional support needs before admission. Leaders told us that patients who might require adjustments were identified in advance during managers’ meetings, so communication or environmental needs could be addressed.

Staff supported patients as individuals and took account of their personal preferences, hydration needs and dietary requirements. Staff told us they could offer a range of options for patients with specific dietary requirements, including halal and vegan meals. Staff also ensured people had access to fluids and meal choices and checked that patients could reach the items they needed.

Care pathways reflected patients’ procedures and individual needs. We reviewed patient records and saw that patients were allocated to the correct pathway for their surgery, supporting safe and personalised care planning.

The service sought and responded to feedback. We reviewed 28 complaints submitted in the last 12 months and saw evidence that the service took action in response. Learning was used to improve patient experience and address individual concerns.

We scored the service as 3. The service promoted patients’ independence, so patients knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff supported patients to be as independent as possible following surgery and encouraged them to regain mobility and confidence. Patients were encouraged to mobilise shortly after their procedure and to move around the ward, toilet and bathroom when it was safe to do so. Physiotherapists provided exercises and taught people new ways of moving to help them get out of bed and become mobile quickly.

The service had a dedicated physiotherapy department equipped with therapy and rehabilitation equipment to promote recovery. Managers told us the department received referrals from both the day case unit and the ward to support early mobilisation and faster rehabilitation.

Staff promoted choice and supported patients with their daily needs. During our inspection, we observed staff offering patients refreshments and snacks and providing menus so people could choose meals that suited their preferences. Staff told us kitchen teams would prepare or source alternatives if a patient’s choice was not on the menu, supporting patients to maintain control over their dietary needs.

The service supported patients to plan for discharge in a way that maintained control and independence. The discharge and rehabilitation coordinator provided patients with a range of support options and information to help them understand the next steps in their recovery and what community or home‑based support was available.

We scored the service as 3. The staff listened to and understood patient’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to patient’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff responded promptly to patients’ immediate needs and ensured patients were comfortable and well supported throughout their stay. Patients could summon staff using call bells, when they did ring, staff responded quickly. Emergency call buttons were located at each bed space and in other clinical areas, including theatre and recovery, so staff could call for assistance without delay. Patients appeared comfortable during our visit; they were calm, had relaxed facial expressions, and moved around without difficulty.

Staff observed patients regularly and intervened when they noticed discomfort, distress or changes in condition. We observed staff assess patients for pain or nausea and provide appropriate interventions straight away. For example, staff attended promptly to a post‑operative patient who was nauseous and vomiting, ensured they were comfortable, administered anti‑emetic medication and completed appropriate observations. We also observed staff regularly assess patients for pain and provide timely pain relief.

Patients had their mobility aids, such as walking frames, close by, and staff assisted them to use these safely until they regained confidence and mobility. Staff encouraged people to eat and drink when they were able and checked regularly that patients had access to water, refreshments and items they needed. Housekeeping staff asked patients what they wanted to eat and drink.

Staff were empathetic and considerate of the stress associated with undergoing surgery. We observed staff providing verbal reassurance and emotional support during pre‑operative and post‑operative care. Staff spoke calmly, offered explanations and maintained a reassuring presence, helping to reduce feelings of anxiety about their procedure.

Managers encouraged staff to reflect on incidents to support learning and improvement. One staff nurse described how they reflected on an incident involving a person who had arrived distressed and did not want their surgery. A staff nurse spent time speaking with the person, explored their concerns, and identified that they were very nervous rather than unwilling to proceed. After reassurance, the person agreed to continue with the procedure. The reflective account showed good practice aligned with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) code and was shared with colleagues to support wider learning.

We scored the service 4. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff had access to the resources and facilities they needed to work safely and maintain their wellbeing. Staff told us they were able to take breaks, and we observed managers proactively allocating break times. A dedicated staff kitchen was available on the ward, equipped with tables and chairs for use during rest periods. In the theatre, managers told us there were plans to refurbish the coffee room for staff.

Staff felt able to raise concerns and were supported to speak up. Staff had access to service Freedom to Speak Up (FTSU) Guardian and FTSU Champions.

Staff wellbeing was actively supported through a range of initiatives. Leaders told us staff had access to an Employee Assistance Programme offering guidance and counselling on issues such as finances, health and mental wellbeing. Staff could also access occupational health support, and leaders operated an open‑door policy. Additional wellbeing activities included “Time to Talk” sessions, lunchtime walking groups, free fruit for staff throughout January and new physiotherapy gym equipment available for staff to use out of hours. Mental Health First Aiders were also available within the service.

Staff felt supported in their roles and confident in their abilities. Staff we spoke with told us they were supported to access training relevant to their role. Staff also told us they felt confident in carrying out their day‑to‑day duties.

Managers carried out annual appraisals, with senior staff appraising junior colleagues, and staff said they were encouraged to set goals and review progress. Managers identified staff training needs and supported development. For example, two healthcare assistants were working towards their nursing associate qualifications and were due to complete their training this year. This demonstrated the service’s commitment to staff wellbeing and career progression, which helped improve morale and support staff retention.

Staff felt supported by leaders and colleagues and described a positive workplace culture. Staff we spoke with reported good support from managers and felt confident raising concerns. Staff we spoke with told us they had not experienced bullying. Staff also told us they felt able to contribute to service development and improvement discussions.

Managers told us the service supported an inclusive environment and made reasonable adjustments for staff when required. Staff we spoke with told us they did not currently require adjustments but were aware of the process and felt confident that support would be provided if needed.

Staff were made aware of their shifts in advance and could submit requests. Managers told us they provided flexible working arrangements for staff who needed them. Staff said they could make rota requests early, which supported a better work–life balance.

Workforce feedback was gathered and used to understand staff experience. The 2025 staff survey showed that 82% of staff agreed that the organisation cared about their health, safety and wellbeing, and 85% said they valued the non‑pay benefits available to them. Both results were above the provider’s national average across all services.