Queens 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

This means we looked for evidence that the service met patients’ needs. This was the first inspection for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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

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.

Staff across all areas of diagnostic imaging understood the importance of ensuring patients received clear information to help them make informed decisions about their care. To support this, the service provided information in a range of formats and languages and had introduced a video translation system for patients who required interpretation. This system reduced the need for face‑to‑face interpreters and gave staff instant access to more than 100 languages, including British Sign Language.

Staff made reasonable adjustments wherever possible, such as extending appointment times, and they treated patients as individuals. Staff accessed specialist nursing teams, including learning disability and dementia nurses to help them support patients and adapt care.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of patients and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Teams within the diagnostic imaging departments worked closely with patients to ensure that their diverse needs were recognised, respected and met during their interactions with the service. Staff worked closely with other teams, such as the emergency department and referrers to ensure patients experienced a smooth pathway and joined up care. Staff updated patient records and ensured that documentation was accurate.

Diagnostic imaging teams carried out tests promptly so patients could move smoothly through their care without unnecessary delays. Staff worked closely with teams throughout the hospital, inparticularly the emergency department, to ensure that patients could access scans and tests in a timely manner. This helped to ensure that care was well coordinated and consistent.

The service offered flexibility when arranging appointments and patients told us that staff would try and accommodate any changes to appointments. There were options to manage appointment bookings electronically using the online portal ‘patient knows best’ or to receive appointment letters by post.

In diagnostic waiting areas we saw signposting to local community support groups if required.

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

Patients were provided with appropriate and accurate information during their appointments. Staff gave patients clear guidance and information around what would happen during their examination and patients felt able to ask questions.

Leaflets around procedures were available and where appointment letters had been sent these were included. These were available in alternative languages to English.

Patient information could be accessed in a range of languages and formats by scanning a QR code, and interpreter services were available by telephone, video or face to face when required. Staff were also able to obtain British Sign Language interpreters for patients who communicated this way.

The service ensured that it was compliant with the Accessible Information Standard (AIS). The AIS is a legal requirement that ensures people with disabilities, impairments or sensory loss receive information in a format they can understand. Any additional communication needs were identified as part of the booking process and documented in the patient’s records.

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

Patients were encouraged to provide feedback, both positive and negative, about their experience of the service. Information signposting patients to the Patient Advice and Liaison Service (PALS) was displayed in waiting areas, and details on how to make a formal complaint, including access to the trust’s complaints policy, were readily available.

Feedback cards were available for patients to provide feedback to the service, and patients could request direct contact from the service if they had specific concerns. In addition, patients were able to share their experiences through the NHS Friends and Family Test. This information helped the service identify emerging risks, understand patient perspectives, and make improvements.

Data reviewed during our inspection showed that between October 2024 and October 2025, diagnostic imaging services had received 43 complaints. Of these, 28 were upheld or partly upheld. Complaints covered a range of themes including staff attitude, waiting times and discrepancies in reports. The trust had a formal complaints policy that aligned with NHS complaints standards and relevant legislation. Complainants were managed in line with trust policy and complainants were offered the choice of attending a complaint meeting followed by a written response or receiving a written response only.

Clinic managers were encouraged to resolve concerns informally at the point of contact wherever possible, to prevent escalation to a formal complaint. Staff we spoke with felt confident doing this. They told us they found it an effective way to address patient concerns promptly. Staff also told us they received support when involved in a complaint and were provided with feedback following investigations.

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

Patients could access diagnostic services when they needed them. The diagnostic imaging service operated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for emergency cases. For routine appointments, most diagnostic services ran on weekdays, typically between 8:00 and 20:00 with additional appointments available at weekends. Staff scheduled most services in advance, and the service always maintained adequate medical cover to support emergency imaging.

The diagnostic imaging department was located on the ground floor and was easily accessible to all patients including those with mobility needs. The initial waiting area was spacious, clean and welcoming with adequate seating for patients to wait before they were moved to the appropriate area based on what imaging they were attending the department for.

Patients told us they received appointments promptly and felt their care and treatment was well coordinated. They reported having a choice of appointment times and locations and could book appointments by telephone. The trust was also trialling an online booking system.

As part of the inspection, we requested data on current scan wait times. As of 21 January, 77.4% of patients received their scan within national and local targets. The trust’s average performance was 77.6% across 2025. This represented an improvement on the previous year and aligned with the national average.

The service monitored “did not attend” (DNA) rates across imaging. Data provided for the period November 2024 to October 2025 showed an average DNA rate of 5.9%, which was below the NHS average. The service had processes in place for managing non-attendance, including a reminder system that supported improved attendance. A service action plan identified trends, contributing factors, and opportunities for improvement.

Staff made reasonable adjustments for patients when required, including supporting accessibility and communication needs. Staff understood the importance of ensuring these adjustments were in place. Patients could bring a relative or carer to their appointment; however, staff informed them that, due to radiation safety, accompanying persons could not enter the imaging room during procedures.

Some services were available across multiple locations within the University Hospitals of Derby and Burton trust. Staff told us this helped reduce waiting times in some cases, as patients could be offered an earlier appointment at an alternative site. However, some patients preferred not to travel and chose to wait for imaging at their nearest location. Staff told us that patient choice was respected and that patients were supported to attend the site that best suited their needs.

The service provided clear information on how patients could access the hospital using public transport and offered guidance on available parking at the hospital site.

The trust had collaborated with an external organisation to produce detailed accessibility guides for all hospital sites within the trust.

Staff had access to policies and processes to promote equality and diversity in outcomes. Staff completed training in equality, diversity and human rights and at the time of our inspection 95% of staff had completed this training, which was in line with trust expectations.

The trust had an inclusion and belonging policy which was reviewed regularly. Staff understood the diverse needs of patients and understood how to access additional support when required. As part of the Health and Social Care act CQC registered providers must ensure that their staff receive learning disability and autism training appropriate to their role. As this training is mandatory NHS England had set a target of 30% compliance for Oliver McGowan training by the end of 2025, whilst this had not been achieved the trust were on target to meet this by the end of March 2026. This had not been achieved due to significant delays to implementation nationally within Health Education England and NHS England.

A quality and equality impact assessment policy was in place, aligned with NHS England guidance. This ensured that equality impact assessments were completed appropriately for policies and procedures, helping to prevent any disadvantage to vulnerable people or those with protected characteristics.

The trust prioritised inpatient and cancer reporting and since November 2025 they had received external funding to reduce the wait for cancer examination reporting and allowed the 4-week standard to be set. As a result of this focus on cancer reporting, routine X-rays were the lowest priority, this meant almost all the people waiting more than 4 or 6 weeks for their results were waiting for X‑ray reports.

The service collected data on the patient groups accessing diagnostic imaging services through NHS Friends and Family Test feedback. Appointment letters were automatically generated in the patient’s recorded preferred language; however, text message reminders were only available in English.

The evidence showed a good standard. 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.

Due to the nature of diagnostic imaging staff were not directly involved in providing end of life care for patients. However, staff understood DNACPR and ReSPECT forms. DNACPR stands for "Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation" and is a medical decision that states that a patient should not be resuscitated if their heart stops or they stop breathing. ReSPECT stands for recommended summary plan for emergency care and treatment. The ReSPECT process creates a summary of personalised recommendations for a person’s clinical care in a future emergency in which they cannot make decisions or to express wishes.

Staff supported service users to make decisions about their care and treatment. Staff took account of their individual needs, wishes and feelings. Patient referrals came from other trust departments internally and from healthcare partners. The trust worked to ensure results were shared as quickly as possible with the referrers, so patients had enough time to make informed decisions about their future.