Stockton Dialysis Clinic

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first rated assessment for this service. This key question has been rated Good: This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We assessed 7 quality statements from this key question.

We found that all service-users had individualised care plans in place, which reflected their own personal needs and choices. Patients could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics. The service had good links with local NHS Trust partners, and were able to escalate any concerns quickly.

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

We checked ten patient records and saw individualised care plans, centred around the needs of each service user. We observed nursing staff discussing fistula education with a patient, and we heard from patients about the choices they had made about their own treatment, for example whether to have a fistula.

Doctors attended the clinic regularly, and there were good links between the service and NHS Trust so patients could be seen outside of routine appointments if required.

The provider had a policy to support with the management of missed appointments. All missed appointments were followed up by telephone contact and when staff could not make contact, a welfare visit was requested to ensure that the service user was safe. Staff then worked with the service user to try to arrange another suitable appointment so that treatment outcomes were not compromised.

We were told that Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans were in place for patients and these were checked regularly as part of the health and safety audit.

There was a proforma in place with clear guidance to assist staff when working with patients who might have cognitive impairment. This prompted staff to ask for learning disability passports and ‘this is me’ documentation for people with dementia, and also prompted staff to use communication aids when required. Staff compliance with Oliver McGowan training was 100% and compliance with Dementia Awareness training was 90%

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The provider had a clear admission and discharge policy which provided guidance to staff on the admission, movement and discharge of patients.

Patients attended the clinic regularly over a long period of time. Each service user had a named nurse, so staff knew their patients’ health and care needs well and this promoted continuity of care. The clinic was open six days a week, and offered a range of treatment times, including over-night dialysis, so patients had choice.

Staff had close working relationships with dieticians and consultants through regular meetings as well as ad hoc communication via telephone and email as needed, promoting joined up care.

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

There were notice boards in the waiting area with a range of relevant information displayed. There were posters with contact details for support groups, information on how to provide feedback, how to complain and what to do in an emergency, for example if a fistula was bleeding uncontrollably. We also saw examples of patient educational materials presented in clear text with pictures to support. All the materials we saw were printed in English, but the service was able to provide the information in a variety of languages through their central services.

Staff compliance with accessible information standards training was 100%.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Details of how to complain and how to give feedback were clearly displayed in the waiting area. There was also a ‘you said, we did’ poster providing feedback to patients on what the service had done in response to their feedback.

Following the most recent patient survey, the service took a number of actions in response to the feedback. For example, named staff were allocated to ensure patients were swiftly referred to external services for additional renal support and more time allocated to ensure patients received additional information in areas such as kidney disease.

There were three complaints in the past year, and all were resolved internally with details shared at nursing handover meetings.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service had a policy in place regarding admission, transfer and discharge of patients.

The service offered a wide range of appointment times and worked with people to try to give choice of dialysis session times when possible

The clinic was on the ground floor, and there were wheelchair accessible scales available for patients who required this.

Many of the patients relied on the ambulance service to transport them to and from the clinic, and we heard from both staff and patients that there were frequently long delays in waiting for transport. Patients told us that the clinic staff always followed up delays with the ambulance service, but they said that it didn’t make any difference to their experience. We saw evidence that staff had raised these concerns on behalf of patients at contract monitoring meetings.

Staff told us that it was very rare for any issues to interrupt the running of the service, but if this did happen patients affected by any changes to the dialysis schedule were informed immediately and rebooked within the same day. Provision for dialysis could also be accessed through a neighbouring clinic at North Ormesby and transport provided to this location, as required. The service worked in clusters which ensured regional support was available when needed. The service had a business continuity plan in place which outlined clear actions to be taken in this event.

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

The service had access to translation services if any patients required this, and written information could be provided in different languages via Central Services.

We heard from staff about processes put in place to support a service user with specific communication and sensory needs.

There were policies and processes in place to promote equity, diversity and inclusion in the workforce, and the benefits that this brings to patients was highlighted in the Diaverum Global Diversity and Inclusion policy. Equality, diversity and human rights training was provided to all staff, and 95% of the staff at this service had completed this training, which was above the 90% target rate set by the clinic.

Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the patients felt empowered to give their views. In 2024 72% of patients at this service responded to the Patient Perception of Care survey, and the response rate to the 2025 survey had risen to 92%.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Patients told us that the staff were very supportive. We observed staff engaging in discussions with patients about their future treatment. Patients also told us that the clinic had close links with support organisations such as the Kidney Patient Association, who visit the clinic to offer support to patients and their families at all stages of their condition. We also saw contact details of support organisations clearly displayed on the waiting room notice board.

A multi-disciplinary approach to patient care was taken, with staff at the clinic working very closely with NHS staff including consultants and dieticians, and clinic staff could request referral to other professions if required. All staff had received training in ‘Difficult Conversations – A Guide for Health Professionals’ delivered by Kidney Care UK.