St Andrews Healthcare Northampton

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

During our assessment we observed some positive and responsive interactions between staff and patients. However, staff were not available for all patients as most staff were involved with enhanced observations. Most patients told us that staff treated them with kindness and compassion, however 2 carers raised concern regarding patients’ treatment. Not all partners were assured that people were always treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. Whilst most patients told us that they were treated with respect and dignity, two patients told us that this was not always the case. Staff told us that patients were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to understand their rights by using different ways to communicate. Staff told us that they use interpreters but also that they use IT such as google translator in everyday discussions. Patients did not always have access to activities and the local community to promote and support their independence, health and wellbeing, due to staffing levels. Some staff told us that they were unable to respond immediately to patient’s needs, as on occasions staff had to be taken off another patient’s observations to attend to the patient’s personal care. Staff also told us that incidents had occurred when they were unable to facilitate patients’ leave or activities. The provider had systems and processes in place for staff support including mandatory and non-mandatory training, supervision and appraisal; however, staff were concerned about the lack of support at ward level, due to staffing levels. Staff had regular opportunities to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or staff experiences. However, leaders had not always provided support to staff post incident and following periods of sickness. Not all staff feel valued by their leaders and their colleagues. Some staff told us how their annual leave had been cancelled despite them having booked flights.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Most patients told us that staff treated them with kindness and compassion. However, one patient said that only some of the staff were understanding and had treated them with compassion, two patients said that staff don’t understand them, one patient told us that an agency staff member had been abusive towards them, and one patient told us that staff didn’t understand their background. Two patients told us that some staff were not kind whilst one patient added that there wasn’t a culture of kindness. Patients said that staff assisted and supported them when they needed help, when they were able to do so, however assistance could be delayed due to staff availability. Most patients we spoke with, told us that staff were mindful of preserving their privacy and dignity. However, two patients said staff were not always respectful, and two carers raised concern regarding patients’ care and treatment.

There was not always a culture of kindness and respect between colleagues. Leaders had not always provided support to staff post incident and following periods of sickness. Staff had not always been supported for people with ill health.

Not all partners were assured that people were always treated with kindness, compassion and dignity in their day-to-day care and support, or that people believe that staff will respond to their needs quickly and efficiently, especially if they were in pain, discomfort, or distress.

During our assessment we observed some positive and responsive interactions between staff and patients. However, staff were not available for all patients as most staff were involved with enhanced observations.

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.

Most patients told us that they were treated with respect and dignity. However, two patients told us that staff had not always been mindful of preserving their privacy and dignity. One patient told us that staff do not always knock when entering the patients’ bedroom and that staff had been abrupt, Patients told us that they can keep in touch and meet up with people who were important to them, including family and friends. Patients and carers had access to visitors’ rooms on the wards, however these were not always welcoming.

Staff told us that patients were supported to have choice and control over their own care and to understand their rights by using different ways to communicate. Staff told us that they use interpreters but also that they use information technology such as google translator in everyday discussions. Staff supported patients to maintain relationships and to have access to their friends and family while they were using a service.

Patients did not always have access to activities and the local community to promote and support their independence, health and wellbeing, due to staffing levels.

The responses we received from people regarding this question was limited. Most patients felt that their needs, views and wishes were listened to. However, some patents told us about delays in obtaining their prescribed activities or leave. One patient told us that they were unable to access a gym but wasn’t aware why. One patient told us that they had not seen their plan of care and another patient told us that staff had not included or informed them of any change in their care and treatment. Most patients felt that their needs, views and wishes were listened to. However, some patients told us about delays in obtaining their prescribed activities or leave.

Some staff raised concerns about staffing levels and how this was affecting their ability to respond to patient’s immediate needs. Some staff that they were unable to respond immediately to patients who had become incontinent and that on occasions staff had to be taken off another patient’s observations to attend to the patient’s personal care. Staff also told us that incidents had occurred when they were unable to facilitate patients’ leave or activities.

Throughout the inspection, we were able to observe staff and patient interactions. Some staff approached patients with respect and dignity however, some staff (undertaking observations) were not always engaging with patients who were awake.

Not all staff felt valued by their leaders and their colleagues, and told us that due to staffing levels, their annual leave had been cancelled despite them having booked flights. However, the provider’s leave procedure states that “employees should not book their holiday travel arrangements before their leave is approved by their manager.

The provider had systems and processes in place for staff support and provide both mandatory and non-mandatory training. Managers provide support for staff in terms of supervision and appraisal; however, staff were concerned about the lack of support at ward level, on a day-to-day basis due to capacity due to staffing, however staff had access to a senior nurse on call. The provider had processes in place to identify staffing issues and clinical demand in real time. However, despite this staff told us that they often had to work below recommended numbers or with staff who did not have the required skills and competencies.