The Countess of Chester 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 means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

Staff demonstrated compassion and supported patients' dignity for end of life care.

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.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

We observed staff supporting patients and loved ones during the last 24 hours of life. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity. A side room was found where possible depending on the needs of infection prevention and control on the ward at the time.

Chaplaincy, spiritual and pastoral services were offered to people regardless of belief or non-belief. Staff told us they honoured the spiritual and cultural wishes of the dying patient whilst making sure patients needs were met.

Staff were trained to prepare the deceased before they were taken to the mortuary and collected by the funeral directors. Staff ensured privacy and dignity of the deceased person was maintained and this was audited.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff gave examples of supporting the dying person and those identified as important to them through the last hours of life.

Palliative care support was determined based on clinical need and priority of the patient. We observed sensitive and clear communication between staff and those identified as important to them. Staff encouraged making memories and patients having their favourite tastes for the last time.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

We found patients were not always supported by having choice and control over their own care and treatment. For example, choosing a preferred place of death may not be possible due to the stability of the patient. Rapid transfers were facilitated where possible.

Visiting times were not restricted for end-of-life care patients and relatives were able to stay overnight.

Patients were encouraged to have taste for pleasure/taste for comfort. This is a specialised and compassionate approach in end-of-life care using favourite or nostalgic flavours to provide sensory pleasure and comfort when a person can no longer eat or drink or has swallowing difficulties.

We scored the service as 2. The evidence showed some shortfalls. The service did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We found some patients experienced delays in pain relief where the palliative care team had given advise and this was not followed in a timely manner.

We saw patients did not routinely have an advanced care plan to document their preferred care and place of death.

Some staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the emotional and social impact of a person’s care, treatment, or condition on both patients and their loved ones. The hospital offered additional support through chaplaincy services, which staff could access to further support patients and their relatives.

We observed the palliative care team prioritising patients according to immediate needs to support symptom control and pain relief. The palliative care team did not have capacity to see all the patients that were referred for review.

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff had access to a wide range of wellbeing support through the trust’s wellbeing team and hubs. They could refer themselves or be referred by managers for one-to-one support. Around 200 staff volunteers, including mental health first aiders and wellbeing champions, offered peer support and guidance.

Wellbeing hubs were open 24/7 and provided information, rest places and specialist support. For example, with alcohol, miscarriage, baby loss and counselling through partner organisations. Occupational health was also available for advice on fitness for work and staff wellbeing.

The wellbeing team ran drop-in sessions on wards after incidents, busy periods or significant events. Staff could access the employee assistance programme at any time for counselling, advice on money, housing, relationships or domestic abuse.

Clinical supervision for the specialist palliative care team which included psychological support was planned to start January 2026.