- NHS hospital
Northampton General Hospital
We served a warning notice on Northampton General Hospital on 21 March 2025 for failing to meet the regulations related to safe care and treatment in the emergency department due to overcrowding and because significant improvement was required to improve patient flow through the hospital.
Report from 6 February 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings - Medical care (Including older people's care)
Our view of the service
Northampton General Hospital (NGH) is part of the University Hospitals of Northamptonshire. NGH provides acute medical services for a population of 426,500 patients in West Northamptonshire. The hospital provides hyper-acute stroke, vascular, and renal services to patients living throughout the whole of Northamptonshire and on the borders of neighbouring counties. The hospital has an accredited cancer centre and provides cancer services to a wider population of 880,000 patients living in Northamptonshire and parts of Buckinghamshire. We last inspected this service under our previous methodology in 2019, when it was rated as ‘requires improvement’.
We carried out an onsite assessment on 18 and 19 February 2025 of urgent and emergency care and medical care as part of a review of urgent and emergency care and systems pathway pressures work.
We assessed 24 quality statements and have combined the scores for each of these to give the overall rating. We looked at all quality statements under the key questions of Safe and Well-led. After our assessment, the service’s rating remained the same.
As part of this inspection, we visited the following wards: Esther White Ward, Creaton Ward, Brampton Ward, Holcot Ward, Becket Ward, Allebone Ward, Dryden Ward, Knightley Ward, Benham Ward, Eleanor Ward, Hawthorn Ward, the Discharge Lounge, and Walter Tull Ward. We visited the hospital to check that suitable care, equipment, and processes were in place during times of higher system pressures. We spoke with 41 members of staff, and 17 patients, observed 3 board or ward rounds and 2 operational bed meetings.
During this assessment, we found some concerns about patient flow through the hospital, infection prevention and control, and record keeping. We raised concerns with the provider during and immediately following the inspection as required.
We found 3 breaches of the legal regulations in relation to infection prevention and control, medicines management, supporting staff with annual appraisals, and training and governance.
Staff did not consistently follow best practices for infection prevention and control and did not always document medicine administration times. We also found that venous thromboembolism risk re-assessments were not always carried out in line with national guidance.
Appraisal compliance for some staff groups was poor.
Governance processes were not managed effectively to ensure risks were identified and mitigated and that action plans for service improvement were monitored and reviewed.
On 20 March 2025, we served a Section 29A Warning Notice to inform the trust that significant improvements were required to improve patient flow through medical care and to ensure timely discharges.
In instances where CQC has decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found in this assessment.
People's experience of this service
Most patients and any family with them were positive about the staff treating them with warmth, kindness, and respect.
Some patients and families reported a lack of communication about their care and treatment and clarity about the discharge process. One patient told us “I don’t know what the plan is, and I’ve been waiting all day.”
Some patients reported there was a lack of privacy at times. One patient told us “There is no privacy when I speak to the doctors because of the space between the beds.” This was because additional beds had been placed in patients’ bays.
During our inspection, we observed staff were kind and compassionate and mostly responded to patients’ needs in a timely way. However, staff were not always alert and did not always take time to observe, communicate, and engage patients in discussions about their immediate needs.
Records showed that patients were seen by the required specialist. However, we found patients’ paper-based records were not always completed fully.