• Hospital
  • NHS hospital

Queen Mary's Hospital

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Roehampton Lane, Roehampton, London, SW15 5PN (020) 8487 6000

Provided and run by:
St George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Important: This service was previously managed by a different provider - see old profile

Assessment report published 28 August 2025

On this page

Caring

Good

28 August 2025

We looked for evidence that people were always treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. We checked that people’s privacy and dignity was respected, that they understood that they and their experience of how they were treated and supported mattered. We also looked for evidence that every effort was made to take people’s wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating remained good. This meant people felt well-supported, cared for and treated with dignity and respect.

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.

Kindness, compassion and dignity

Score: 3

The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Feedback from patients we spoke with was consistently positive. This included comments that the ‘care has honestly been fantastic, I can’t fault it’ and ‘have been so kind, caring and friendly which has made all the difference’. Other patients told us they had received treatment at the centre more than once and did not want to go anywhere else because the care had been so good.

We reviewed Friends and family test results and saw these were consistently higher than average, between 99% and 100%.

There was a strong, visible person-centred culture. Staff understood and respected the personal, cultural, social and religious needs of people using the services. They respected people’s privacy and dignity and took action to preserve this.

Staff told us there was a positive culture within the surgical treatment centre. Staff were observed to be kind and respectful to each other and those we spoke to consistently told us there was a supportive culture. There was a clear focus on the emotional wellbeing of patients.

Treating people as individuals

Score: 3

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. Staff took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff treated people as individuals and considered any relevant protected characteristics. We saw examples of this during our inspection. This included where patients with a learning disability or dementia were able to be accompanied by a family member.

Staff took account of people’s individual communication needs. Translation and interpreting services were available, and information was available in different formats.

Patients consistently told us that staff explained things to them in a way they could understand. They involved patients in decisions about their care and treatment. One patient said, ‘I appreciate that the staff answered my questions, and I had many questions’, another said ‘they explained things in a way that helped me understand'.

Independence, choice and control

Score: 3

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff worked to ensure that information was shared, and patients were informed of benefits and risks associated with treatment, so that they could make informed choices and control over their own care.

Information leaflets were available to patients about their procedure and treatment. This included information relating to post operative care at home and how to care for any wound. Patients we spoke with told us the information they were given was provided in a way that was easy to understand and enabled them to have control over their post operative care.

Responding to people’s immediate needs

Score: 3

The service 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.

We observed staff responding quickly to people’s needs. Patients in recovery were closely monitored and staff acted to minimise discomfort and concerns.

Assessment processes included the identification of individual needs. In addition, team leaders reviewed patient records prior to the day of surgery to ensure additional individual needs were met.

Patients told us their pain was well managed, and staff ensured a calm and peaceful environment in recovery which was appreciated.

Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Score: 3

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff were consistently positive about the support they received from managers and service leads. They had regular breaks, and their break room was well equipped, and they were provided with bottles of water throughout their shift.

Managers organised team events for staff. This included a beach day and Christmas party. Managers and staff participated in fundraising events to fund staff wellbeing activities. This included skydiving and abseiling activities, as well as cake sales and raffles.

A trust wide staff survey was carried out, with comparative results collated by division and directorate. We saw that results for theatres and anaesthetics were generally higher than the trust average. One area that was below at 46% compared to a division score of 50%, related to opportunities for career progression and we saw that this was addressed as part of the divisional priorities developed. These included protected time for high value activities such as training and research, focusing on celebrating success and improving collaboration across the division. We saw specific action had been taken to make these improvements. This included a protected learning session held monthly for theatre staff, away days and team activities for staff, and the development of regular divisional bulletins for staff.

The trust had staff and team recognition awards. There were also staff networks and support systems.