Royal United Hospital Bath

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

For the caring domain, we looked at the quality statement, ‘kindness, compassion and dignity’ and ‘Responding to patient’s immediate needs’. We rated this good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff treated patients with kindness and compassion, respected their privacy and dignity, and took account of their individual needs. Patients reported positive experiences. All 5 patients interviewed from the 3 wards we visited praised staff for their kindness, compassion and respect for their privacy and dignity. For example, staff were attentive to patients’ needs, as 1 patient said, “They’re always smiling and asking how I am”. Another described feeling like “a princess” and “nothing was too much trouble for them”. All 5 patients felt respected and understood, and staff spoke to them in ways they could understand. Staff adjusted communication styles, like speaking louder for a partially deaf patient. Staff provided care with respect and discretion. We observed courteous interactions and staff knocking before entering rooms. All 5 patients reported staff pulling curtains around their bed spaces for privacy and dignity purposes during care, and discussions about their care and treatment. One patient noted the professionalism and calmness of the staff. Patient feedback audits evidenced how members of the senior leadership team had a clear oversight of patients' experiences in relation to kindness, compassion and dignity. The monthly matron oversight audit confirmed 100% of patients stated care and treatment was communicated in a way they could understand, and patients felt they had been treated with dignity and respect throughout their stay.

Staff across wards were approachable and openly discussed compassionate care, ensuring patients with protected characteristics (e.g. disability, religion) received individualised support under the Equality Act 2010. Forrester Brown Ward staff, for example, discussed how they referred a patient to the Learning Disabilities team to ensure that person received expertise and individualised care that met their needs. Pulteney Ward staff explained how they adjusted care for a sight and hearing-impaired patient by providing a single room, visual aids via the use of pictorial flash cards, and more frequent checks, to ensure their safety. All staff emphasised treating patients equally and without judgement. Staff across all wards, including Philip Yeoman Ward, ensured patient confidentiality by closing doors and conducting quiet handovers at nurses’ stations to avoid overheard conversations.

The service had positive reviews according to other partner organisations. For example, a patient on Robin Smith Ward stated, ‘they can only praise all the staff from the cleaners, tea tray ladies, nurses and doctors.’ They rated the service 5 out of 5 stars for dignity and respect.

Nurses provided care to patients which was kind, empathetic and compassionate.

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.

Feedback from patients across the 3 wards we visited praised staff responsiveness. Patients told us they were listened to, spoken to in ways they could understand, with staff taking time to talk with them and address any needs promptly. Patients mentioned pain management being on point, with one saying, “They’re always asking me whether I am in pain and look at the timings of when I am due any pain relief. They are always on time with this”. Similarly, referrals for ongoing needs were swift, like a patient who reported, “A young physio came in yesterday and asked about the situation at home so they’re wonderful with providing support”. Overall, patients felt confident staff would address any discomfort or distress, with one witnessing a busy staff member comforting a distressed patient.

Staff and leaders highlighted various initiatives to respond to patient’s needs. These included dedicated clinical nurse specialists for dementia, diabetes, tissue viability, and end of life care. Forrester Brown Ward utilised link nurse roles for these areas, which meant nurses who worked on the ward permanently had additional knowledge and expertise within a specific area (e.g. tissue viability) to ensure patients received the care they needed in a timely way. Pulteney Ward, a surgical acute ward, cared for patients who needed diverse feeding support. Staff collaborated with dieticians and speech and language therapists to ensure patients could receive adequate nutrition. Food and fluid charts were kept, monitoring patients’ intake and to ensure staff could be responsive to a patient’s changing needs, as well as their immediate needs. On Philip Yeoman Ward, we observed a member of staff settling in a new patient who had arrived on the ward. The member of staff ensured the patient had their call bell to hand, offered food and drink, and asked if they were comfortable. All wards offered a phone/in-person translation service, phone chaplaincy supporting faith needs, learning disability passports, and ‘This is me’ booklets for people living with dementia. This gave staff the tools to respond to a person’s needs in a person-centered and timely way.

Staff listened to patients and took time to understand patient needs.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.