- NHS hospital
Northampton General Hospital
Assessment report published 13 November 2025
Contents
Ratings - Urgent and emergency services
Our view of the service
Urgent and Emergency Care (UEC) services at Northampton General Hospital are provided by Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust. They provide general acute services for a population of 426,500 in West Northamptonshire and hyper-acute stroke, vascular and renal services to people living throughout the whole of Northamptonshire. The hospital is also an accredited cancer centre and provides cancer services to a wider population of 880,000 who live in Northamptonshire and parts of Buckinghamshire.
We carried out this assessment to check the quality of services in response to a Section 29A Warning Notice (WN) we served to the trust in March 2025 following an onsite assessment in February 2025. The WN required the trust to make improvements in relation to the potential of harm to patients in the emergency department, systems and processes to manage patient flow and privacy and dignity. At our assessment in February 2025, we rated the UEC service as requires improvement overall. The safe key line of enquiry was rated as inadequate.
During this inspection we assessed 5 quality statements across the key questions safe, caring, and well-led. These quality statements related to the areas of improvement required in the WN.
We visited all areas of the Emergency Department (ED). We reviewed the environment, looked at care records and spoke to staff and patients. We spoke with 7 patients and 14 staff members across various grades. We observed meetings, reviewed performance information about the trust and observed how care and treatment was provided.
Following a review of all the evidence from this follow-up assessment and a review of additional information provided by the trust before and after our inspection, we are satisfied that improvements have been made in line with the requirements of the WN.
We did not rate this service at this assessment. The previous rating of requires improvement overall remains.
At this inspection we found:
There was a greater awareness of the risks to people across their care journey. Improvements had been made to systems and processes to support flow through the department. Risks were assessed, and people and staff understood them. Staff assessed patients risks of developing a pressure ulcer or skin damage.
The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion. The service made changes in the environment to maintain patients’ privacy and dignity. Corridor care had been significantly reduced.
Trust wide response to operational pressures within the emergency department had improved. Processes were in place for operational pressures to be escalated to directorate and trust wide leaders. A programme of improvement was in place with clear lines of accountability. A programme of audits had been implemented, and lessons were learned from this.
Whilst improvements had been made, managers recognised continued improvements were required to fully embed and maintain the changes. Environmental upgrades were underway to further improve the safety of patients and flow within the department. These additional building improvements had not been completed at the time of our assessment. We continue to monitor the progress of improvements to service and will re-inspect them as appropriate in line with our process.
People's experience of this service
Feedback from patients and their family or carers were generally positive about the care and treatment they had received. Patients reported staff to be kind, caring and empathic. They were offered food and fluids throughout their admission and given pain relief when required. Patients told us staff worked hard and tried their best to respond to them in a timely manner.
We observed improvements in how patients’ privacy and dignity was maintained in the department since our previous site visit in February 2025. Most patients felt their privacy and dignity was respected by staff.
Whilst patients were generally positive about their experience whilst in the department, they did not all feel they were kept up to date about their treatment journey by staff.