Frimley Park 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 rated caring as good. We assessed three quality statements around kindness, compassion and dignity, responding to patient’s immediate needs, and workforce wellbeing and enablement. Most patients we spoke with told us they were treated with kindness and respect when receiving care. Patients told us they felt reassured by their care. Workforce wellbeing was prioritised by leadership and was reflected in initiatives undertaken to support the staff. Staff felt supported by their managers and colleagues due to a strong team culture.

It was difficult to maintain patient’s confidentiality due to environmental factors. However, efforts have been taken to address this environment and improve patient confidentiality. Staff took care to deliver good compassionate care to all patients. There were posters on the walls requesting patients alert a staff member if they needed assistance. We observed staff were interacting with patients in all areas.

Staff reported the workload still negatively impacted their wellbeing. Staff worked in a highly pressured environment and incidents of violence and aggression made their jobs more difficult. Staff told us that abusive behaviour from patients caused mental and physical harm. Leaders had taken action to address this through staff wearing body cameras.

We have not awarded this service a score for Caring.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Caring.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. Patients told us they felt reassured by the staff and were confident in their care. Friends and family survey results from December 2024 indicated 80% had a very good or good experience and 12.84% had a poor or very poor experience.

Staff at all levels sought to accommodate patients’ needs and demonstrated a caring attitude to people with mental health needs. The electronic patient records system allowed for transparency in patient needs and cultural preferences. There were facilities and support available for patients with dementia including two dementia-friendly rooms and twiddle sleeves. However, staff told us they were not always able to meet needs for patients with dementia. The dementia-friendly rooms were frequently used by staff to conduct examinations on patients. As a result, staff told us that they would try and seat patients living with dementia in quieter areas as much as possible.

Staff were able to access appropriate interpretation services to communicate with patients. However, staff told us that due to the diversity of the team, the staff adjusted the allocations so that a staff member who spoke the patient’s language could treat the patient.

Chaplaincy staff and facilities were available to support patients, carers, and staff in response to cultural, religious, or unexpected needs such as a death. Two relatives’ rooms were available for private conversations.

Staff worked to protect patient’s dignity. There were shower facilities on-site for patients and we observed staff escorting patients to the toilet.

Although corridor care was in place, staff worked to protect patients’ dignity using ‘pitstop’ care for initial and intimate examinations. There was guidance on the wall with acceptable and unacceptable corridor care staff behaviour. Patients cared for in the corridor told us they ‘could not fault’ the care the staff provided. The Urgent and Emergency Care (UEC) Survey 2024 results reflected patients were treated with respect and dignity overall and when being examined or treated. Staff were determined using this area needed to be recognised as temporary and also an inappropriate way to have to care for patients. However, patient dignity was not always preserved in the corridor. We observed a patient having an abdominal examination with consent but without a screen in place for privacy.

The service did not always provide confidential care to patients. Staff and patients told us it was difficult to maintain patient privacy when checking in at reception. The glass barrier, difficulty with the microphone, proximity of the check-in areas to each other hindered confidentiality. Plans were in progress to address this to offer more privacy for patients.

There was a culture of collaboration and respect between internal and external colleagues. We observed administrative staff interacting positively with ambulance staff during a handover, handling an urgent transition with patience. This positive culture allowed staff to provide compassionate care for patients.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The department had effective processes and tools for assessing patients when they first presented to the department. Staff used a national triage tool to triage patients. Patients with immediate needs were triaged to the appropriate services including Urgent Treatment Centre (UTC), Minor Injuries Unit (MIU), and Ambulatory Emergency Care Unit (AECU).

The service had a clear system to identify people with mental health needs and align to the appropriate pathway. During triage, nurses completed the mental health risk assessment, grading risk as low, medium, or high with guidance on supporting patients at each level of risk. Data showed the ED performed well in triaging patients with mental health needs and providing appropriate support in accordance with their risk.

We observed a triage of a patient who arrived with injuries related to a mental health need. The patient was treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. The patient was informed of the plan and consented to treatment. Safeguarding concerns were highlighted because of the triage process. The nursing staff demonstrated good understanding of the need for safeguarding referrals.

The Children's ED had a dedicated psychiatric liaison service, Core13, for a quicker assessment and discharge of children and young people. However, this service had not been working to capacity due to issues outside of the service's control. For further details see the Safe systems, pathways and transitions part of the report.

There was signage at the ED front door that stated patients would be treated according to the severity of their condition.

There were mechanisms to address patient's comfort needs. Staff told us housekeeping conducted comfort rounding three times a day. The service also used a 6 hour care plan electronic alert to prompt staff to offer refreshments. Staff told us nutritional needs including cultural and religious needs were identified during the comfort rounding. Staff told us patients were offered hot meals three times a day.

Staff responded to patient's needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. We observed a nurse re-assess a patient's pain after discussing the care plan and provided pain relief in line with the patient's pain score. The Urgent and Emergency Care Survey 2024 reflected these observations. The response to `Do you think the hospital staff helped you to control your pain?' was above the national average.

Staff had a clear understanding of patient needs due to the electronic patient record. For example, an electronic dashboard which included all patients within the department was used to identify patients with immediate needs or additional support such as timely Parkinson's medication.

There was clear signage in the waiting room and patient bathrooms for patients to raise a complaint. Staff were aware of the complaints process and provided examples of learning from patient complaints. For instance, there was patient feedback regarding lack of information and provision for patients experiencing homelessness. As a result, a specific pack had been created to give patients which included, information regarding their legal rights, support charities, how to access a GP and a toiletries pack.

We observed staff frequently checking on patients in the corridors. For example, we observed a compassionate caring interaction where a member of staff took time to stop and talk to a patient and offered physical comfort by holding their hand and providing reassurance.

Staff responded to people's needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. For example, staff went the extra mile to accommodate a patient attending with mental health needs.

There was an inclusive organisational culture which enabled staff to have a sense of belonging. Leaders told us staff wellbeing was important to them. This was reflected in the Frimley Health Foundation Trust 2020-2025 Strategy with staff wellbeing as a key pillar. Several staff members told us they had worked at Frimley Park Hospital for several years due to the work culture. Several staff members referred to the staff as a "family and one team."'

There were mechanisms to collect staff feedback and reflect on staff concerns to deliver high quality person-centred care. Staff told us they felt listened to by leaders and were able to escalate concerns directly to them. The leadership team hosted a `picnic meeting' where staff raised concerns directly to leadership to highlight issues important to staff.

Staff told us they were able to influence change and contribute to decision-making in the department. Leaders empowered frontline staff to drive initiatives to improve quality and safety. For instance, following several incidents, staff recommended the addition of Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) status to the patients' wristbands for easy identification in an emergency. This change was trialled and there had been positive feedback from staff.

The service supported staff onboarding and continued professional development. Nurses received one month of induction and were offered the option to extend this supernumerary period until they felt comfortable in their role. Training days were organised multiple times a year and focused relevant areas. For example, the resuscitation study day included learning on trauma, heart arrhythmias, and chest drains. Staff told us they were provided cover to attend the training. A mentorship programme was in place for staff to continuously identify and develop skills.

Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. There was adequate staffing coverage during shifts to allow breaks. Staff told us the nurse in charge arranged or provided cover if needed so that nursing staff could take their breaks.

Leaders supported staff wellbeing through offering flexible shift scheduling to accommodate reasonable adjustments. For example, a staff member with a temporary injury only worked in specific areas of the department to support recovery.

Staff told us they were valued by leaders. There were support mechanisms in place to support staff in the event of catastrophic events including a Trauma Risk Management (TRiM) debrief and the chaplaincy team. Thirteen staff had completed TRiM training staff were encouraged to complete a TRiM referral for any potentially traumatic event. TRiM is a trauma-focused peer support system Staff told us the ED staff recently used the chaplaincy support in autumn 2024. The support was positively received.

The service had a clinical fellow wellbeing lead who organised wellbeing initiatives. Information regarding the wellbeing lead, wellbeing support, and initiatives in action was posted for staff in a public hallway. The wellbeing initiatives included a dedicated staff wellbeing room, Wellbeing Wednesday which consisted of a roaming trolley with snacks for staff, and a garden for staff to take breaks in.

Although staff welcomed the wellbeing initiatives, staff told us the workload and stress still impacted their mental health. Additionally, there was a high volume of patient violence and aggression towards staff. The service had rolled out body-worn cameras to certain staff which contributed to an increased sense of work safety. However, it was unclear if the cameras had decreased the frequency of incidents and staff member told us that they did act as a deterrent. Data provided by the trust showed that between June 2024 and January 2025, violence and aggression to staff was the second highest reported incident, with 89 incidents reported.