Royal Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Updated 16 October 2019

Royal Papworth Hospital is the UK’s largest specialist cardiothoracic hospital and the country’s main heart and lung transplant centre. The hospital offers a range of services for outpatients and inpatients, including cardiac, thoracic, transplant, radiology and pathology services.

Royal Papworth Hospital is a regional centre for the diagnosis and treatment of cardiothoracic disease, it is also a national centre for a range of specialist services including pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA), balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA), heart and lung transplant and extra corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Royal Papworth Hospital has the largest respiratory support and sleep centre (RSSC) in the UK.

The hospital is a purpose-built hospital on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus and treats more than 100,000 patients each year from across the UK.

(Source: Trust Website / Acute RPIR – Context acute tab)

The trust has 244 inpatient beds, physical capacity for 46 critical care beds and employs approximately 1,770.53 whole time equivalent staff.

Between March 2018 and February 2019, the trust saw:

• 20,727 inpatient admissions
• 107,402 outpatient appointments
• 168 deaths

(Source: Trust Website / Acute RPIR – Context acute tab)

Updated 16 October 2019

See overall summary above.

Our rating of services improved. We rated it them as outstanding.

Updated 16 October 2019

Our rating of this service improved. We rated it as outstanding because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept accurate care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided outstanding care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
• There was a truly integrated approach to assessing, planning and delivering care and treatment to all patients who used the service. Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness and provided care which respected their privacy and dignity and took account of their individual needs. Staff recognised patients’ emotional and social needs as being as important as their physical needs, addressed them, respected the totality of peoples’ needs and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support and information to patients, families and carers in innovative ways.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

Updated 16 October 2019

Our rating of this service stayed the same. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their treatment and care. Patients we spoke with told us they felt safe, that the care they received was appropriate to their needs and would recommend the care to others. Staff provided emotional support to patients, families and carers to promote their wellbeing whilst in hospital and following discharge.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of people both locally and nationally. They took account of patients’ individual needs and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

Updated 16 October 2019

We previously inspected diagnostic imaging jointly with outpatients in 2014, so we cannot compare our new ratings directly with previous ratings. We rated it as good because:

• Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available seven days a week.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. They successfully managed the move to the new hospital site and ensured there was no disruption to service for patients.
• Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. They felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to continuously improving services.

Updated 16 October 2019

We previously inspected outpatients jointly with diagnostic imaging in 2014, so we cannot compare our new ratings directly with previous ratings.

We rated it as good because:

• Staff had received up-to-date training in safety systems, processes and practices in place to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse. Staffing levels were adequate to keep people safe and the skill mix was under review to ensure appropriate staffing levels were planned for. Risks to people who used services were assessed, monitored and managed on a day-to-day basis and staff could access the information they needed. Infection prevention and control measures were given high priority and were well-embedded.
• People’s care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with current evidence-based guidance, standards, best practice and technologies. This was monitored to ensure consistency of practice. Staff, teams and services were committed to working collaboratively to deliver joined-up care to people who use services.
• People were supported, treated with dignity and respect, and were involved as partners in their care. Feedback from people who used the service, those who were close to them and stakeholders was positive about the way staff treat people.
• Services were organised and delivered in a way that met people’s needs and facilities and premises were appropriate for the services being delivered. Care and treatment was coordinated with other services and other providers. Waiting times, delays and cancellations were managed appropriately. The leadership, governance and culture promoted the delivery of high-quality person-centred care and there was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation, including through appropriate use of external accreditation and participation in research.

Updated 16 October 2019

Our rating of this service improved. We rated it as outstanding because:

• Staff provided outstating care and treatment. Managers consistently monitored the effectiveness of the service, ensured staff were competent within their roles and participated in local national audits to improve patient outcomes.
• Staff of all types worked together in innovative ways for the benefit of patients. Patients accessed up to date advice on how to lead healthier lives, staff supported them to make decisions about their care, and key services were available seven days a week.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their treatment and care. Patients we spoke with told us they felt safe, that the care they received care appropriate to their needs and would recommend the care to others. Staff provided emotional support to patients, families and carers to promote their wellbeing whilst in hospital and following discharge.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of people both locally and nationally. They took account of patients’ individual needs and made it easy for people to give feedback. Patients could access the service when they needed it and care staff planned and delivered individualised care.
• Leaders managed services using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. They successfully managed the relocation of services to the new hospital site and ensured there was no disruption to service for patients during the change of service.
• Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. Leaders, managers and staff focused on the needs of patients receiving care and used innovative treatment and technology to improve patient lives. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged with stakeholders to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to continuously improving services.