Victoria Infirmary

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

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good at this assessment, the rating remains the same.

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.

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.

Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

Patients feedback was very positive about the care and treatment they received.

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.

We saw the service worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population.

One of the biggest challenges for the service was inappropriate attendance to the minor injuries unit. We were told communications had been sent out to local GP practices to inform them, but patients continued to attend due to the positive feedback.

During our assessment we witnessed telephone calls from patients who lived out of area asking if they could attend the service.

The service had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information about care and treatment was given and consent was recorded in the patient record.

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.

Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback. The biggest complaint from patients was about car parking which the trust was managing due to building work.

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

All patients followed the minor injuries pathway and were signposted to other service when needed. Patients could self-refer to the service.

Patients were directed to out of hours and emergency services after the service closed.

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.

Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

People were supported to know what to do if there was any deterioration or concerns following their care and treatment.