Broadgreen 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

We rated this key question good. Patients were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information patients could understand. Patients knew how to give feedback, and were confident the service took it, and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination and patients received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People participated in planning their care although some experienced long waiting lists for treatment.

This service scored 43 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Most patients understood their care options and felt it had been conveyed to them in a way they understood. They told us they had had the opportunity to ask questions about their care with one person commenting ‘it wasn't needed, they explained everything.’

Staff understood and applied person-centred care in their roles. Nine wards were assessed in Broadgreen Hospital in relation to person centred care, 7 were rated gold and 2 were rated silver, with no wards falling below the desired standard.

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Patients we spoke with were on the whole positive about their experience in this hospital. They spoke highly of the staff and told us they felt listened too and staff were responsive.

Staff told us they spent time with patients simply chatting and using the activities area. Staff knew how to meet patients' needs respectfully and with consideration to cultural or religious needs.

This division used ‘discharge to assess’ process well, and it was understood by the

multidisciplinary team. We saw that there were processes in place for safety measures when following the discharge to assess process, such as holding the bed until the assessment at home is completed and deemed a success. In addition, safeguarding and complex discharge teams were accessed to transition patients home safely and ensure the correct packages of care are in place.

Discharges and transfers after 5pm and 8 pm were due to delays with transport and outside of Broadgreen Hospitals control. This division reported 27 discharges in December 2024 after 5pm compared to 17 in November 2024. This division also reported a total of 11 transfers after 8pm, but 9 of these occurred in December 2024 so was likely to be because of winter pressures causing delays. We were provided with examples of alternative transport provision provided by another trust to support patients to get home and transfer other patients in.

Broadgreen Hospital does not board patients at any time. All patient transfers to the site were planned and bed spaces identified prior to transfer.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

The Friends and family test (FFT) satisfaction score for Broadgreen Hospital inpatients highlighted a marginal increase from 97.41% in November 2024 (309 responses) to 98.18% (220 responses) in December 2024. In comparison with FFT score in December 2023 (95.08%, 244 responses) this highlighted a substantial improvement in satisfaction score. The top presenting themes from inpatient FFT feedback captured during December 2024 were positive staff attitude, implementation of care, environment, and patient mood/feeling. One negative comment received related to communication.

Complaints were classified as simple or complex and designated a timeframe to resolve. The timescales were in line with the NHS Complaints Standards for `Closer Look Single Issue' which was 90 Days and `Closer Look Complex' was 180 Days. The service had met this timeframe consistently. During the 3 months prior to assessment, Broadgreen Hospital closed 4 `closer look single issue' complaints with 75% closed within timescales. Broadgreen Hospital did not receive or close any closer look complex complaints during the same time-period. Staff understood how to raise complaints and support patients and families to make them. The department had a complaints procedure and information was displayed on boards on wards including PALS.

The trust was working with the `valuing patient time collaborative' to improve communications, using technology like mass text communications to update general information. The trust promoted the patient and family surveys to all inpatients and the trust used this information to address complaint themes, but also to identify positive learning. Senior leaders told us by using patient stories in meetings they have been able to put the patient back in the room, helping staff to put the patient at the heart of everything. They reported it had been a good exercise for reflective practice.

Information boards provide details of Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PaLS), patient stories, learning and positive feedback also. Staff felt the culture was one of learning and not blame and as a result they felt confident in reporting incidents.

The LQA audits of communication rated all wards as gold which was above 90% in all areas of audit compliance.

Learning was disseminated to staff through daily ward huddles, face to face meetings, emails, and information boards. Patient leaflets were available with relevant information in different locations.

Staff worked with Healthwatch and patient groups to review literature available to patients about the trust and medical conditions to ensure that it was easily read and understandable

The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff worked hard to provide the best experience for patients. They felt supported in their work by managers and support teams.

Boarding patients at this site was less that the trusts’ other locations. However, during times of high acuity in other areas at the trust, wards at Broadgreen had been temporarily repurposed to accommodate and support different cohorts of patients. Staff described a recent example that worked well with minimal impact in terms of access to services for existing inpatients. At the time of our visit almost all areas had reverted to their original clinical designation.

Referral to treatment (RTT) performance for medical care was lower than the national average at 50.48% of referrals seen within the national timeframe (18 weeks). This was despite there only being a small increase in referrals from 4617 to 4746 in this time period. This site had no patients waiting over 65 weeks.

The trust reported patients waiting over 52 weeks which had reduced significantly over the last 12 months and remained steady at 15 patients waiting at the time of assessment.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.