• Hospital
  • NHS hospital

Royal Shrewsbury Hospital

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Mytton Oak Road, Shrewsbury, Shropshire, SY3 8XQ (01743) 261000

Provided and run by:
Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust

Assessment report published 21 August 2026

Ratings - Medical care (Including older people's care)

  • Overall

    Good

  • Safe

    Requires improvement

  • Effective

    Good

  • Caring

    Good

  • Responsive

    Good

  • Well-led

    Good

Our view of the service

Medical care is part of the division of medicine at Royal Shrewsbury Hospital which operates under Shrewsbury and Telford Hospital NHS Trust. Medical care was provided across various inpatient wards and departments for adults. Each had a multi-disciplinary team including clinical nurse specialists. We inspected the service as part of our winter pressures programme on an unannounced basis (staff did not know we were coming) to enable us to observe routine activity.

We inspected on site on 3, 4 and 12 March 2026. As part of our inspection, we inspected the Acute Medical Unit (AMU), Medical Same Day Emergency Unit, Short Stay Unit, a respiratory ward, a surgical ward where patients are placed when medical wards are over capacity/full, and 5 other medical ward/areas.

We spoke with 57 members of staff including senior managers, ward managers, registered nurses, health care assistants, discharge officers, domestic staff, catering staff and medical staff. We also spoke with 12 patients and their relatives and reviewed 24 patient records.

We looked at 27 quality statements across all 5 key questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-Led. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse and managed safety well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and supported them to make decisions about their care. Staff treated patients, their relatives and visitors with compassion and kindness. The service prioritised patients’ individual needs. However, the service did not always have enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff did not always adhere to infection control principles. The governance around management of medicines and Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) was ineffective. Systems and processes were not always followed when prescribing, administering, and recording medicines. Compliance with completion of the Malnutrition Universal Screening Tool was poor. Patients who were referred to treatment did not always receive treatment in a timely manner. Leaders did not always operate effective governance processes.

At this inspection, medical care services remained as requires improvement. The rating for safe, effective and caring stayed the same. The rating for responsive and well-led improved. We identified breaches of 3 regulations around the failure to provide timely treatment, compliance with infection prevention and control guidance, management of substances hazardous to health, not always having safe staffing levels, and improvements needed in governance.

People's experience of this service

Patients told us that they and their families felt safe and were confident to raise concerns. Patients who used the service were involved in planning their care and making decisions about their treatment and discharge. Patients told us they were looked after by kind and compassionate staff who gave the best care they were able to. They also told us they received good care and treatment.Patients reported that staff responded promptly when help was required. Patients said they were given opportunities to ask questions and were involved in making decisions about their care.

Patients, families and carers were positive about their experiences within medical care services at Royal Shrewsbury Hospital. Patient experience data indicated the service was performing well with patients responding they would recommend the service.

Patients reported that their treatment had been clearly explained, including test results and any subsequent care plans. They also stated that the risks associated with procedures were outlined to them, along with discussions about their aftercare.