Clifton Park Hospital Limited

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We make sure people are at the centre of their care and treatment choices and we decide, in partnership with them, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service 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.

Care was planned with the patient to identify any individual health concerns and avoid any delays in treatment.

We heard staff arranging appointments to suit the patients’ requirements.

We understand the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Over the last 6 months MRI and CT referrals to appointment time were on average completed within 4 weeks. Ultrasound was just over 12 weeks, which the department was monitoring, and this would be reduced when the newly recruited staff commenced.

The hospital's onsite MRI was available three days per week, this supported the current levels of referral, and the service met the six-week target. 

The hospital had on site access to a mobile CT scanner once a month, which ensured all patients were scanned within a 4-week period. This currently met the demand.

We provide appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that we tailor to individual needs.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Staff talked with patients, families and carers in a way they could understand. This helped them understand their care and treatment. They used effective communication aids where necessary. Staff found effective ways to communicate with patients with communication difficulties.

Information leaflets about the services were readily available in all the areas we visited.

Staff could provide information in different languages or other accessible formats and could access language interpreters if needed.

The service had an electronic performance dashboard which included information around clinical indicators such as patient safety, incidents, and complaints. We observed that information on service performance and key risks was shared with staff through the morning huddle and documented in team meetings.

We make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. We involve them in decisions about their care and tell them what’s changed as a result.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service routinely engaged with patients through a variety of methods, including surveys. We observed posters and leaflets with QR codes throughout the service. These invited people to give feedback.

Patient feedback was positive about their waiting time and communication.

The diagnostic service had not had any complaints. The manager explained where a patient had been unhappy, they had been to speak to them on the ward to resolve the patients concerns. As a result of this they had made changes to ensure patients had pain relief 30 minutes before having postoperative imaging.

We make sure that everyone can access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Services were designed to make them accessible and timely for people who were most likely to have difficulty accessing care. The hospital provided services for NHS and private patients, over the age of 18 for diagnostic imaging.

The service provided elective surgery across NHS patients on the referral to treatment waiting lists, under commissioning arrangements with local NHS acute trusts.

Patients told us they received treatment in a prompt and timely manner and did not experience long waits when they arrived for their treatment. 

Patients had an initial consultation to determine whether they needed surgery, and the diagnostics department supported this with a walk-in x-ray service, meaning people did not have to return for another appointment.

The service monitored waiting times from referral and made sure people could access services promptly when needed. They monitored people who did not attend their appointments and cancellations and offered a further appointment.

The department was wheelchair accessible and there was a dedicated faith room identified for patients, visitors, and staff.

There was adequate medical cover day and night, a doctor could attend the department in an emergency, the outpatient’s area had a clear protocol on when they would call an ambulance if the patient required urgent care

We actively seek out and listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. We tailor the care, support and treatment in response to this.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Staff within the service and the wider organisation promoted a culture in which the people using the service felt empowered to give their views. They had speak up for safety embedded across the organisation and staff could raise any concerns.

The provider had undertaken equality impact assessments of their policies and procedures to ensure they did not place vulnerable people or people with protected characteristics at a disadvantage.

Staff were all trained in equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

We support people to plan for important life changes, so they can have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

The service did not have end of life patients, however they had developed a flagging system to alert clinicians promptly where unexpected findings had been identified on scans or images. This enabled prompt follow up to discuss ongoing care.