Derriford 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 looked for evidence that people and communities were always at the centre of how care was planned and delivered. We checked that the health and care needs of people and communities were understood, and they were actively involved in planning care that met these needs. We also looked for evidence that people could access care in ways that met their personal circumstances and protected equality characteristics.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has improved to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

We have not awarded this service a score for Responsive.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Responsive.

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.

We observed staff tailor the service to meet the individual needs of people. We heard an example of how one person who needed support relating to their learning disability had a person centred approach wrapped around them for their hospital admissions and how to minimise their distress.

People told us they had been seen by doctors and nurses in a timely manner. They were able to raise concerns and staff dealt with them.

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.

There were processes to support joined up care. Discharge planning processes supported continuity of care once people were discharged.

NICE guidance recommends all surgery for fractured hip should be performed within 36 hours of admission, ideally on the day of or the day after admission. Between 2024 and 2025 the trust improved surgery within 36 hours from 44.7% to 70%. While this significant improvement since the last assessment, it has not yet met the target of 85%, their performance continued to improve.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats were tailored to individual needs.

Patient information leaflets were available on the trust website. Some were offered in large print, other formats (easy read) and available in different languages. The trust provided patients with a range of discharge information in liaison with One Devon including contact details of external agencies.

The trust website’s accessibility page allowed most information on the website to be navigated using just a keyboard, speech recognition software or listen to the website using a screen reader. There was also the ability to change colour and contrast and zoom in to support people’s access to the information.

People said they were provided with the information they required.

For people with hearing impairment, interpreters, lip speakers and sign language services were available.

People said they had received all the information they needed and felt well informed about delays or cancellations. People said they were given time to digest information and were able to ask questions if they required further information.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Detail about how to give feedback about care and treatment was on the trust website.

The trust’s concerns and complaints policies gave staff guidance about managing and responding to concerns and complaints. There had been trust wide work to improve timely resolution of complaints and responses, ensuring open conversations with patients and families and a focus on learning and improvement.

Any lessons learned were shared with teams and identified actions were taken forward.

The service used the Friends Family Test (FFT) and comments included: “Absolutely amazing…everything went to plan” and “Staff friendly and engaged. Wards spotlessly clean… Felt supported before leaving to go home”.

People told us they had opportunity to discuss their concerns. They felt listened to and involved in the decision-making process.

The service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

UHP benchmarks as better than the national average of 84.5% for theatre use. This was an improvement since the last assessment.

Waiting times for planned surgery was monitored and reviewed at governance meetings. Reasons for cancelled surgery included theatre list overrunning or no space on list due to emergency surgeries taking priority.

The service was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to referral to treatment times for incomplete pathways and cancer waiting times for people waiting less than 62 days from urgent GP referral to first definitive treatment. Improvements were found at this assessment and the service had improved in comparison with latest national published figures. Similarly, the trust treated cancer patients within 62 days in line with the latest national published figures.

The environment on wards supported people with dementia to have equal access to facilities. Staff could access support and guidance from specialist nursing teams such as learning disability nurses, dementia nurses and the psychiatric liaison team (the latter provided by another service partner).

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

There were processes to support staff to deliver care and treatment that did not put patients with protected characteristics at disadvantage.

There were policies to guide staff about the use of restraint (including chemical restraint) and restriction to ensure they were not used inappropriately.

Staff made sure people living with mental health problems, learning disabilities and dementia, received the necessary care to meet their needs. Most people said their individual physical and mental health needs were met which was an improvement since the last assessment.

The trust’s Equalities and Human Rights Impact Assessment guided staff for the collection of data to ensure risks for complying with their responsibilities for groups with protected characteristics were addressed.

The trust participated in a national study, the National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death (NCEPOD), focusing specifically on rehabilitation following critical illness.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Staff provided information for children and families to help them make decisions about their future choices. For example, making healthy food choices and family planning.

The trust said they were about to take part in a research project to deliver a virtual surgery school(from July 2025) to a group of people with cancer.

People said discharge planning was discussed with them, they had no concerns and knew what to expect. Most people told us medicines were clearly explained and information provided at discharge. However, one person said the discharge process had felt rushed.

The service followed the trust’s Recording and Filing of Living Wills and Advance Directives process. These indicate individuals’ wishes about future medical treatment. These were recorded and compliance was monitored by regular audits.