GenesisCare Centre for Radiotherapy at Cromwell Hospital

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

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and people received fair and equal care and treatment. People were involved in planning their care and understood their treatment options.

At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating changed to good. This meant people's needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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.

Assessment findings:

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and worked in partnership with them when deciding, how to respond to any relevant changes in people's needs. The service involved patients at every stage of the assessment and treatment process. All treatment plans were individualised and were reviewed throughout the time people spent with the service. The caring nature of staff meant staff were open to feedback from patients in real time and were focussed on making their experience a positive one, based on individual needs and preferences. Patients told us that staff had adapted their approach based on their feedback which had put them at ease.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of the people using the service, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Assessment findings:

The service delivered care and treatment to a wide range of people from different countries and cultures and included individual and cultural health needs into assessments. This assisted the service gaining an understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people. The service ensured information was available to patients in a range of languages and formats including Braille. There was access to interpreters and signers which supported individual choice.

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

Assessment findings:

The service used literature from a national cancer organisation, which was extensively available in communal patient areas of the service. This was used as it was information from a trustworthy source and used nationally in a range of health settings. There was a broad range of information regarding different aspects of treatment and patient experience along the cancer journey. This ranged from assessment to treatment of different tumour groups, managing relationships, diets, holistic needs, hair loss and travel. Information was available in multiple formats that met individual needs including Braille and multiple languages which could be printed out on request as well as links sent to individual mailboxes for convenience.

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.

Assessment findings:

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas throughout their journey with GenesisCare. This included the patient experience survey at the beginning of their treatment to identify individual needs and explore how these needs could be met. Emphasis was placed on the service being open to feedback from patients in real time and focussed on providing local resolution to make their experience a better one. Patients told us there was ongoing dialogue with staff during their interactions and they felt listened to. This had positively influenced how they were treated and made them less anxious.

Patients were provided with information about how to complain in the form of a leaflet which was provided to them at the referral stage along with information about treatments. This was also available in communal patient areas. Complaints were reviewed by the centre leader and addressed by the lead for the specific area of the service it was regarding. Patients received feedback in a timely manner. Complaints, comments and compliments were fed back to staff in meetings and huddles for improvement. The service was affiliated to ISCAS for second stage complaints, when patients or their relatives were not happy with the service's response, who engaged with the national team.

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

Assessment findings:

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Times from referral to treatment were monitored by the service and were compared to similar services within the provider's portfolio to understand performance. Data showed favourable referral to treatment times compared to other GenesisCare sites and enabled the service to understand the reasons for delay, such as machine breakdown or power failure. There were also planned delay due to patient condition or patient preference. The service understood that patients may have days when they did not feel well enough to undergo treatment. In such cases the service worked to rebook at the earliest convenience. To avoid delays in the event of a machine breakdown, the service worked with the provider's other services to provide timely treatment with a matched radiotherapy machine to meet their individual needs. If a patient had to use another service due to machine breakdown, complementary taxis were provided to ensure smooth transition to access other services.

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.

Assessment findings:

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their treatment. Personalised care plans were documented in patient records alongside their assessed and individual needs. This made sure that patients at the end of their life were included in assessments and reviews about their treatment and care. The service worked closely with the co-located acute hospital and other providers to ensure palliative care patients received coordinated and continuous care. This approach ensured relevant healthcare professionals were involved in planning the care and treatment of people with complex needs. All known deaths within 30 days of treatment were reviewed by the provider's national mortality committee and peer reviewed for learning.