West Cornwall Hospital

Updated 14 July 2026

Date of assessment from 10 to 11 March 2026. West Cornwall Hospital provides a range of NHS hospital services. This assessment looked at surgery services only which were rated requires improvement in our last assessment. At this assessment, the rating has improved to good. The rating from surgery has been combined with ratings of the other services from the last assessments and the overall rating of West Cornwall Hospital remains good. See our previous reports to get a full picture of all other services at West Cornwall Hospital.

Updated 18 December 2025

The assessment was carried out from 10 to 11 March 2026. We carried out this assessment in line with our routine assessment priorities. We assessed 33 quality statements for the five key questions: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

The service was last rated during an assessment in September 2018 and it was rated requires improvement. At this assessment we rated the service as good.

Day case surgery services at West Cornwall Hospital were provided by Royal Cornwall Hospitals NHS Trust (the trust). Patients were assessed against strict criteria to determine their suitability for treatment at this site, with those identified as higher risk receiving surgery at the main Royal Cornwall Hospital site.

The service had effective systems and processes to deliver safe, high-quality care. Staff treated people as individuals, ensuring their care, support, and treatment were tailored to their needs and preferences.

Patients received appropriate monitoring and support before the surgical team left. Observations followed trust policy, with clear escalation procedures for patients whose condition deteriorated post-operatively.

Medicines were managed and used safely.

Staff were skilled, understood their responsibilities regarding safeguarding and safety, and treated people with kindness, compassion, and dignity.

Communication, including with the main Royal Cornwall Hospital site, was generally effective. Leaders were developing a new system to improve the timely communication of theatre list changes to ward teams.

Leaders had a clear vision for the service, supported by systems that identified risks to both patients and the organisation. At the time of the assessment, the trust was implementing a new operating model for its clinical divisions, leading to a restructuring of senior management within surgery. Most staff described an open and supportive working environment, although some examples of cultural challenges were noted. Leaders demonstrated a clear understanding of the service, acknowledged these concerns and demonstrated proactive steps were being taken to address them.

Updated 14 December 2018

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

• Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were rated good. Safe was rated as requires improvement.

Updated 14 December 2018

We previously inspected outpatients jointly with diagnostic imaging so we cannot compare our new ratings directly with previous ratings.

We rated this service as good because:

• The hospital provided a safe service to patients and made sure they were protected for avoidable harm and abuse. There were safe levels of staffing to cover clinics who had completed mandatory training to enable them to provide safe care, records were well maintained, and infection prevention and control practices adhered to.
• Staff were competent to carry out their role and we saw examples of good multidisciplinary working between staff in the department.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect and there was a strong patient centred culture. Staff recognised when they need to provide emotional support and how to involve patients and those close to them in their care.
• Services met the needs of the population and the individuals attending clinics. Reasonable adjustments were made for patients with physical disabilities where possible. There was information available for patients to make a complaint.
• Risk was understood and managed, and the governance framework made sure aspects of quality and safety were regularly reviewed. Staff felt valued and respected and said there was a positive, open working culture. The governance framework supported the delivery of good quality care and risk was understood and managed.

However:

• Electrical testing was not up to date and there was a risk a deteriorating patient may go unnoticed in one area of the one small area of the waiting room not covered by the cameras.
• The storage of patient records did not always ensure patient confidentiality.
• Accessibility was a challenge to some patient groups due to the ageing building, layout and facilities
• Patient outcome data was not always effectively utilised to identify areas for service improvement.
• Staff were not familiar with the trusts vision or values and they did not feel part of the wider organisation.

Updated 14 December 2018

• Safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated good.