St Helier Hospital and Queen Mary's Hospital for Children

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

Although the service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, they did not always respect people’s privacy and dignity. The service did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment.

The trust had several initiatives to promote the wellbeing of their staff. However, the service had major capacity issues which hindered the delivery of person-centred 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 but did not always respect their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Most patients told us they were treated with kindness and dignity by staff, and this was echoed by their relatives and friends. Patients frequently described the care they received from staff as exceptional. They described staff interactions as respectful and warm. However, some other patients and their relatives were not happy about the timeliness of care received.

Paediatric patients and their relatives in the paediatric emergency department were very happy with their care, although some of them expressed that they were not happy about the length of time spent on the unit.

The service did not always respect patient privacy and dignity. A significant number of patients were assessed and examined in temporary escalation areas including corridors. Most patients in these areas had no privacy screens which compromised their privacy and dignity. Staff often carried out assessments in the corridor area and people could overhear conversations with other patients. Patients had to be taken to the resuscitation area or other clinical areas for personal care. In one case, a relative informed us a patient was usually continent but now needed pads. We observed a patient on the corridor was given a bottle to pass urine. The patient was protected by a screen to one side of the trolley; however, they were clearly visible to other patients and relatives on the other sides of the trolley. In another case, we observed a patient with their underwear exposed.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The service did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not always respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We received mixed feedback from patients about how staff responded to their immediate needs. Patients generally felt staff responded to their needs when they were able to. However, some patients felt staff they did not always have enough time for everyone.

Some of the patients we spoke to informed us staff acted to minimise any discomfort or distress. One relative said, “My daughter has bipolar and the nurse made her calm.”

We spoke to a patient in the rapid assessment area. The patient informed us they were unable to hydrate as there was nowhere to keep their fluids, food or personal belongings. The patient was not provided with a blanket and could not cover themselves properly. The patient we spoke with found the area noisy, hot and they were unable to sleep at night.

Results from the 2024 patient survey programme showed that the trust achieved a score of 6.2 for meeting individual needs. This was lower than the national average of 8. The patient survey result was not broken down for the ED or location.

The trust had several initiatives to promote the wellbeing of their staff. However, the service had major capacity issues which hindered the delivery of person-centred care.

We received mixed feedback among teams about wellbeing and support. Some of the staff we spoke with reported feeling supported within the constraints of the environment and capacity issues. They told us they found the service inclusive, and colleagues were understanding and supportive. One staff member informed us the service made reasonable adjustments to accommodate their disabilities. However, another staff member reported that they did not feel supported and felt bullied.

Some nursing staff informed us that they felt restricted by limited budgets which meant they did not have access to training courses they desired for personal development. They informed us some staff had left the trust to access training courses at other trusts as a result.

Medical staff were very positive about the opportunities for training and development and felt well supported by the local leadership team.

Staff generally described the unit as very challenging and overwhelming due to the volume of patients seen and the capacity to see them. Staff described, low morale, high stress and burnout with staff often feeling exhausted.

Although staff generally reported being supported by the local leadership team, they felt they lacked support from the executive leadership team at the trust.

Some staff felt they did not have sufficient time to support patients and their relatives. They felt unable to manage expectations adequately as they were always busy.

We reviewed the ED staff survey responses for people, promise, engagement and morale themes in 2024. People promise theme overall scores were significantly worse when compared the trust average.

The service had several wellbeing initiatives for staff. This included an ED appreciation event, access to counselling, mindfulness with the chaplaincy team, a wellbeing room and access to financial wellbeing support. The trust had a menopause policy which aimed to provide guidance to improve the line manager and employee relationship when managing menopause. The policy outlines symptoms and recommendations to support employees.

The trust provided details of mentorship programmes available to staff. This included development programs for band 5 and band 6 nursing staff.