Queens Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

Staff treated patients as individuals and tailored their care to their specific needs. Patients had choice over their treatment and staff were quick to respond to their changing needs. Outpatients staff had received chaperoning training, and this was pro-actively offered to patients.

Team leaders and line managers were approachable and cared about colleagues’ wellbeing. Staff felt supported by line managers although some thought senior leadership staff were not as visible. Some staff expressed concerns about pressure of work but felt they worked well as a team to provide a caring environment for patients.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care.

We have not awarded this service a score for Caring.

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

The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Staff took the time to get to know patients and showed empathy to them and their families. We saw that patients were respected and treated kindly by reception staff who gave them clear information and provided updates about appointment delays.

Staff conducted appointments in clinical rooms, which ensured patients had their confidentiality and dignity respected. However, in the ophthalmology department, we saw a large room had been set up to provide 3 separate consulting areas, with access to various equipment within the room. However, patients had complained about the lack of dignity and confidentiality during their appointments in this room. Staff arranged for curtains to be used to provide some privacy, but they had also raised this with managers as it was not an ideal solution.

Some clinics had ‘family’ rooms which were less ‘clinical’ and more relaxing for patients. Staff used these rooms to discuss options with patients and their families and allow them time to come to terms with a poor prognosis or handle a challenging period during their treatment.

Many clinical teams were well established and had built up good working relationships with other departments across the hospital and with external support groups. This meant that staff were able to provide information about the wider services that could offer additional support for patients.

Patient feedback data showed 92% of patients expressed that they had received good or very good care in the last 12 months. Patient survey results from May to October 2025 indicated that across the outpatient departments at Queens hospital, there was an overall satisfaction rate of 91.7%, with no department showing more than a 5% dissatisfaction score.

Staff told us they supported their colleagues in the same kind and respectful way they cared for patients. We saw that all staff worked as a close-knit team right across the department. Clinical staff regularly updated reception teams about clinic running times, which in turn enabled reception staff to keep patients informed.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Although the service did not have specific policies to provide guidance in caring for patients with additional needs, the service provided training in learning disability and autism. Staff told us they considered each patient’s individual circumstances and adapted their appointments to suit them.

Staff had a process to note patients with additional needs in their patient record; for example, those with a learning disability, and/ or autistic patients. This enabled staff to make specific arrangements to support these patients. Staff in one clinic told us they could request assistance from a specialist nurse if they had patients with a learning disability or autistic patients coming for an appointment. However, not all patients had their specific needs noted, which meant individualised arrangements were not always in place in advance of the appointment and had to be arranged very quickly. This may have impacted upon patient experience.

The service had a policy to provide guidance for staff about specific faiths and how to respond to concerns from patients about their beliefs and the treatment options available. A multi-faith room was available at Queen’s Hospital for those who wished to use this.

Some clinics saw patients on a regular basis which meant they built up close relationships. They tried to ensure the patient was always seen in the same room with the same staff and had their family with them to provide support. Staff said this familiar routine helped patients approach their appointments with more confidence.

Certain follow-up appointments were likely to be shorter than others and this enabled staff to adapt the clinic list to give patients a longer appointment time if this was appropriate. This meant staff could provide a more individual approach to a patient’s care. Staff also took time to discuss patients’ situations with them. One staff member advised that they had worked with a patient to overcome their reluctance to continue their treatment. Others told us they considered patients’ home situation and other lifestyle factors when discussing their ongoing care.

Staff offered chaperones for patients during appointments, which had been noted as an area for improvement at the last inspection in 2019. Leaders told us that all staff were trained to provide this support, so that this could be provided promptly and effectively. The clinics also provided interpreters and translation equipment to help with communication.

Staff were happy to arrange for a second opinion if patients requested this. Patients told us they felt confident they could ask for this if they required it.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Where appropriate, staff offered patients options around their treatment and encouraged patients to take time to make the best decisions for them and their lifestyle. Staff respected patients’ decisions, and patients said they felt they were in control of their care. They said their care was regularly discussed as their treatment progressed, which enabled them to change their minds or request alternative treatments.

Family members and friends were welcome to join consultations and encouraged to provide support for patients making decisions about their treatment. Patients told us this was useful as it meant families could ask additional questions and help them take in all the information.

The service had a Mental Capacity Act (MCA) policy which stated that all clinical patient facing staff should undertake training in MCA Treatment with lawful consent, with refreshers every 3 years. Staff told us they considered a patient’s best interest and always checked families’ power of attorney situations with patients. If there were specific requirements, for example a patient with dementia, staff would work with that person and their family to ensure they would continue to receive the most appropriate care outside of the outpatient clinic.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff checked on patients’ general concerns and welfare at every appointment. They considered patients requirements at appointments. Staff could flex appointment times and their duration to enable patients to have a better experience.

Patients could advise reception staff or update their appointment bookings by text message if they were unable to attend appointments. This helped minimise missed appointments and enabled clinics to run smoothly.

Patients told us staff were responsive to requests to a change in medication to manage increasing pain or consider other options if a particular treatment was not working. A patient told us they could contact a dedicated nurse if they had any urgent issues with their equipment.

Staff made sure that patients and their families were supported if they received upsetting news. They gave them time and space to reflect and ask further questions. In some cases, they could provide guidance and share information about wider support available for patients.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff felt valued and supported by their line managers although some thought senior leaders were not so visible. Many teams were well established, and some staff had worked at the hospital for many years. They were proud of their work and felt that their close teamwork was one of the key reasons they could provide the best care for patients. One staff member said: “I love my job” and many staff told us about small non-work activities which helped staff get to know each other as individuals as well as co-workers.

Staff told us if they had concerns about the service which was affecting their ability to do their job or was having an impact on their wellbeing, specialty and outpatient leaders took these seriously and took action to resolve these.

Leaders were supportive if staff required short notice changes to their work pattern. Staff said that overtime would be given in cases where clinics continued beyond staff working hours.

Clinic staff organised regular team events and social activities such as quizzes and nights out. Some team leaders held “red carpet” awards, while other teams had created newsletters to share personal news updates with staff. Leaders and staff agreed this boosted morale and encouraged closer team working.

Staff surveys showed that most outpatients staff felt safe from harm at work and that their line managers worked to support them and promote their wellbeing. However, the responses also indicated that some staff felt under pressure and that tiredness was having an impact on their personal life.

Short term staff sickness across the outpatient A and B department between November 2024 and October 2025 was on average at 4.7%, with average long term sick leave at 11.3%.

Outpatient leaders told us they had set up 2-3 wellbeing sessions a year to support staff training, development and wellbeing. Team leaders said that these had been well received and boosted morale.