Mount Vernon Hospital

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

We looked for evidence that people were always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We checked that people’s privacy and dignity was respected, that they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. We also looked for evidence that every effort was made to take people’s wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people consistently feel well-supported, cared for and treated with dignity and respect.

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.

All our observations of care and treatment showed that staff were compassionate, polite and professional. Staff demonstrated empathy when assessing patient pain. They were careful when carrying out physical assessments of patient injury in order not to put the patient in distress.

We observed staff carrying out pre-attendance telephone triage. Staff were empathetic in their discussions with patients. They explained relevant options available to the patients and the reason for their decisions.

People felt they were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity in their day-to-day care and support. All our observations of care and treatment showed that staff were compassionate, polite and professional. People felt that staff listened to them and communicated with them appropriately, in a way they could understand.

People felt that staff knew and understood them, including their preferences, wishes, personal histories, backgrounds and potential. A parent said staff made sure their child “asked questions, put her at ease and didn’t want to bypass her”. They said the care was “brilliant from start to finish” and said staff were “nice and careful”.

People believed that staff would respond to their needs quickly and efficiently, especially if they were in pain, discomfort, or distress. We observed that staff demonstrated empathy when assessing patient pain. They were careful when carrying out physical assessments of patient injury in order not to put the patient in distress.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected and upheld at all times. Patient consultations were held in consultation /treatment rooms behind closed doors. We observed there were curtains within consultation rooms to protect people’s privacy during physical examinations.

People were assured that information about them was treated confidentially and they knew that staff respected their privacy.

There was a culture of kindness and respect between colleagues from other organisations.

People’s individual needs and preferences were understood and these were reflected in their care, treatment and support. The service was accessible and could adjust to meet patients’ needs, including appointment times. All staff had undergone training in equality and diversity and the Oliver McGowan mandatory training on learning disability and autism.

People’s communication needs were met to enable them to engage in their care, treatment and support to maximise their experience and outcomes. The service could arrange translation services for patients who required it.

People’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs were understood and met. Chaplaincy service offered with multiple faiths available, and a prayer room was available for both staff and patients to use.

Staff treated people as individuals, considering any relevant protected equality characteristics. Dietary requirements including vegetarian, vegan and Halal and allergy free food were available for people. Policies were in place to support people with diverse religious needs.

People were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff explained options available to patients and the reasons for their decisions.

People were supported to maintain relationships and networks that were important to them. People had access to their friends and family while they are using a service. People could attend the unit with members of their family for support. Patients had the option to request for a chaperone during assessments.

People’s needs, views, wishes and comfort were a priority and staff quickly anticipated these to avoid any preventable discomfort, concern or distress. Our observation of care showed staff were careful when assessing patient injuries. They involved patients in their assessments to identify areas of pain and prevent unnecessary discomfort.

Staff were alert to people’s needs and took time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs.

Staff could quickly recognise when people needed urgent help or support and use appropriate tools and technology to assist. For example, staff referred patients for x-rays following assessment of patient injuries. They were able to interpret x-ray results and provide treatment options on the same day.

Patients were provided treatment options suitable for them. This included x-rays, physical assessments, dressings and referral to other services.

People received safe, effective and person-centred care as the provider recognised and mets the wellbeing needs of staff. These included providing the necessary resource and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. People benefited from staff who had regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experiences. If necessary, leaders provided a timely and considered response. Staff felt supported in their roles with flexi rotas and opportunities to work part-time. All staff were positive about their roles, the culture of the unit and their ability to provide high quality care to patients. Most staff had worked for the service for a long time and were happy in their roles.

People’s experience of the service was driven by a culture that normalised good wellbeing through inclusivity, active listening, and open conversations. This enabled staff to do their job well and to maintain their well being.

Staff were supported if they were struggling at work. This had a positive impact on the care they delivered to people.

Staff had easy access to personalised support that recognised the diversity of a workforce with proactive and reactive measures.

People were supported by staff who felt valued by their leaders and their colleagues. They had a sense of belonging and the ability to contribute to decision making.