- NHS hospital
Northampton General Hospital
Assessment report published 13 August 2025
Contents
Ratings - Urgent and emergency services
Our view of the service
Urgent and Emergency Care services at Northampton General Hospital are provided by Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust. We carried out this assessment on 18 and 19 February 2025 as part of the system pathway pressures programme. We inspected 24 quality statements across the key questions Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led and have combined the score for each of these areas to give the rating. During this inspection, we visited the emergency department (ED) and Same Day Emergency Care (SDEC). We reviewed the environment, staffing levels, looked at care records and prescription records. We spoke with 47 staff members across various grades and 31 patients and observed meetings. We reviewed performance information about the trust and observed how care and treatment was provided.
At our last inspection in 2019, Northampton General Hospital was rated as Good overall and for all key questions for urgent and emergency care. At this inspection in February 2025, we rated the emergency department as \u201crequires improvement\u201d
On 20 March 2025, we served a Section 29A Warning Notice to inform the trust that significant improvements were required to address concerns we found that could lead to patient harm, improve management of patient flow out of the emergency department and make sure patients\u2019 privacy and dignity needs were being met.
>
We found 3 breaches of the legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment, safe staffing and governance. We requested an action plan to address these concerns.
>
People were at risk of harm because risks were not sufficiently identified and mitigated to ensure the delivery of safe care and treatment, in particular deterioration of condition and development of pressure ulcers. People experienced long waits in the department due to the lack of flow to specialist care in the hospital which contributed to care and treatment being provided in multiple escalation areas. Privacy and dignity was not respected, in particular, communication was not always confidential. There was a lack of governance oversight which meant, incidents were not always reviewed in a timely way, learning and actions from complaints, data and audits were not always identified. Medicines were not always managed in line with national guidance, including time critical medicines were not always administered in line with guidance. Staff received training but compliance did not always meet the trust target or national guidance including childrens safeguarding, Oliver McGowan training and medicines management training. Staff did not always have regular appraisals.
>
However, department leaders and staff worked well together to deliver care and most staff felt able to raise concerns. There were some pathways for patient presenting with poor mental health. The department monitored the use of restraint. Emergency equipment was available to deliver lifesaving interventions. Staffing levels were appropriate and the department worked together to mitigate risks to staffing competency. Staff spoke positively about working in collaboration with other services. Staff understood legislation around consent. People using the department could expect access to translation services and staff were alert to discrimination. Staff caring for people were supported by departmental leaders.
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
Patients and any family or carers with them gave us mixed feedback on how they were treated. We heard some people had long waits, in particular, overnight to receive care and treatment, lacked information, medication and pain relief. However, some patients reported kindness and that staff worked quickly to deliver care needs. One patient who was confused on arrival reported feeling much safer when they were allocated a member of staff to support them.