Guy's 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 using the service were always treated with respect, kindness and compassion. We checked that patients’ privacy and dignity were respected and that person-centred care was central to the service with staff demonstrating cultural competence and involving patients in their plans tailored to their needs and preferences. Patients reported their overall experience as good.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to outstanding. This meant people were truly respected and valued as individuals; and empowered as partners in their care in an exceptional service.

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.

The service was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. Staff always treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Patients and families reported positive experiences and good interactions with staff who demonstrated compassion in the care and treatment they received in the urgent care centre. People reported good communication with staff, with some offering clear information on waiting times and clearly discussing treatment options and any worries. Several people told us staff were “kind” and “caring” and made them feel at ease during assessment and treatment, even when waiting times were long. Staff engaged attentively and ensured people felt heard. Staff directed patients to other services when appropriate and, if required, supported them to access those services. Patients reported that staff respected their perspectives and noted the staff’s thoughtful and supportive approach extended to both patients and their families or carers. For example, we observed that staff reassured and supported the family members of a patient who was transferred to St Thomas’ Hospital to make alternative travel arrangements, responding to their inquiries with compassion and professionalism.

Patients and families/carers reported that staff treated them with care and ensured that their individual needs were met with respect. Patients expressed that they felt valued and listened to and that their or their relatives’ care was clearly communicated and staff dedicated time to answering questions and concerns in a non-judgmental, responsive manner. One parent told us how reassured he felt after their child’s consultation and was particularly impressed with the attention provided to the child and how responsive they were to their needs whilst waiting to be seen.

Staff ensured confidentiality, respected people’s choices and upheld people’s privacy and dignity. Staff brought patients to private rooms for sensitive discussions, using curtains and doors as needed.

Feedback from the Friends and Family Test also showed high levels of satisfaction with the compassion and kindness shown by staff. The vast majority of comments about staff attitudes were positive.

We observed that there was a culture of cooperation and respect between colleagues. Staff collaborated with each other and with other teams within the trust and external to the trust to provide support for people including support with emotional wellbeing.

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 service was exceptional in how they listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff responded promptly to people’s immediate needs. We observed that unwell patients were identified quickly and moved into the holding bay for urgent care and monitoring. Staff escalated concerns appropriately and described how they would escalate deteriorating patients to the hospital crash response team where necessary. The service supported people to have choice and control over their care. We saw staff providing thorough explanations to people, involving people in decisions, and ensuring they had time to ask questions.

Nursing staff monitored the waiting room, to identify people whose condition had changed, and adapted priorities in real time. Processes ensured those at highest risk were prioritised and those with the most urgent needs received timely and appropriate care.

Staff responded to the needs of patients and provided emotional support, advice and guidance to minimise distress and discomfort when needed. Staff talked to people in a way they could understand. We observed that all contact between staff and patients was professional, compassionate and in a way that respected the confidentiality and the dignity of patients.

Information was provided in a way that enabled people to make informed choices. Staff explained what symptoms to monitor, and when to seek further help. Staff also used interpreters and communication flashcards and made adjustments to support people to communicate their needs effectively.

When it was necessary to redirect patients to a different service staff supported this by offering suitable alternatives when the UCC could not meet a person’s needs. This included arranging taxi transfers, booking timed appointments at St Thomas’ GP hub, or directing people to other appropriate services. Staff explained clearly why a transfer or review elsewhere was needed, helping people feel confident about next steps.

The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff reported that they felt valued, respected and supported. They felt that they were an integrated part of the UCC team and wider trust urgent and emergency services team and they had a voice on the way the service operated. They felt very proud of working for the service and the trust. We spoke with a member of staff who had worked for the provider for several years. They told us they chose to remain with the service because they felt supported, empowered, and encouraged in their professional development. They also described feeling well integrated into the team and having a strong sense of belonging since joining the team.

The service made efforts to promote equality and diversity in daily work and provided opportunities for career development, staff told us they were generally treated fairly and with respect. Leaders acted to continually review and improve the culture of the organisation in the context of Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI).

Staff wellbeing was prioritised through a range of organisational initiatives. Across the wider clinical group, staff benefitted from wellbeing and recognition programmes which reinforced the importance of feeling valued at work. These included regular coffee mornings, opportunities for social connection, and a wellbeing Raffle where proceeds funded further wellbeing activities. Additional trust wide programmes, such as the Love Admin Awards, further promoted staff achievement and showcased individual and team impact.

Training and development were embedded in the service. Rotations with St Thomas’ ED enabled staff to maintain skills and confidence in managing a broader range of presentations, and enhanced training such as ENP development, paediatric skills sessions and annual appraisals, with appraisal completion rates at 100% and staff reporting finding these valuable. Most staff told us they valued the opportunities for progression and felt empowered to develop specialist skills. Leaders actively promoted career growth, including supporting staff to become advanced practitioners. Staff shared information about current efforts to explore the broader responsibilities of advanced practitioners in the UCC.

Efforts were made to facilitate flexible working arrangements for staff. Where practicable, reasonable adjustments were implemented to support employees in fulfilling their roles effectively. Staff survey responses indicated an improvement in employees reporting flexible working arrangements compared to the results from the previous year's survey.