Croydon University 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

This was a focused follow‑up assessment for this service. At our last inspection, we rated this key question as requires improvement. During this assessment, the rating stayed the same. We specifically looked for evidence that the service ensured people using the service had their privacy and dignity maintained. The service had made some improvements. However, some aspects of the service did not provide privacy and dignity.

We assessed elements of one quality statement for the caring domain. We looked at the service’s kindness, compassion and dignity.

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 trust did not always treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences.

Due to the lack of flow in the department, we saw there was a lack of privacy and dignity in the escalation areas. However, the trust had invested in privacy screens, which were in use at the time of our inspection. Despite this, we found that conversations were not confidential. We saw doctors talking with patients, delivering news to them and discussing plans for their care in areas which did not preserve privacy and confidentiality. We observed patients being treated with kindness and communicated to in a way they could understand. Patients we spoke with felt staff were kind and compassionate and understood their needs.

We reviewed the patient survey provided by the trust. People who used the service reported a variable and, at times, poor experience. Patients told us staff did not always provide timely reassurance or emotional support, and some said they were not kept informed about waiting times or delays, with only 18% reporting they were informed about how long they would wait. Patients described challenges in accessing help when needed, with less than half (43%) reporting they were able to get help from staff when they needed it. They also reported that staff did not always explore their anxieties or fears adequately, with only 68% confirming this discussion took place, indicating gaps in emotional support.

However, despite these challenges, we found positive feedback regarding staff attitudes and communication once care was delivered. Most patients said staff treated them with respect and dignity (89%), and they felt listened to by doctors and nurses (95%). Patients also reported high levels of understanding about their care, including clear explanations of treatment and strong understanding of discharge information (99%), showing effective communication at key points in the patient journey.

The compliments data provided important positive evidence. The service received 57 compliments, most frequently recognising professionalism (26). Patients and relatives also praised staff for being compassionate (6) and respectful (3). These compliments showed that, despite system pressures, staff often delivered care which patients experienced as professional, and caring. This positive feedback reflected staff commitment to providing kind and compassionate care.

Staff we spoke with understood and respected the personal, cultural, social, and religious needs of patients and how they may relate to care needs. Patients we spoke with told us staff were ‘friendly and helpful’.

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.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.