George Eliot NHS Hospital

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We reviewed person-centred care, providing information, listening to and involving people, and equity in access. Person-centred care: The service was inclusive and took account of patient’s individual needs and preferences. The service had information leaflets available in languages spoken by the patients and local community. Providing Information: The service provided information so patients knew what to expect at their appointment. Listening to and involving people: The service made it easy for patients to give feedback. Equity in access: People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.

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.

All patients we spoke to told us they had been asked their preferred name. They had all received information about their scan or x-ray and had received information about the side effects of their treatment.

Managers planned and organised services, so they met the changing needs of the local population. The service had a new community diagnostic centre (CDC) which had resulted in improvements in capacity for CT, MRI and plain film. The service was inclusive and took account of patients’ individual needs and preferences. Staff made reasonable adjustments to help patients access services. The CDC was fully accessible and the main radiology department was designed to meet the needs of patients with access needs. Staff coordinated care with other services and providers to ensure patients did not have to make too many trips to the hospital. In the new CDC the toilets were inclusive mixed sex toilets. The signs for toilets included an image of a toilet so finding the toilet was easier for people with dementia or communication needs. Managers monitored and took action to minimise missed appointments. The trust used a text reminder service which also allowed patients to send a response to say if they were going to attend their appointment or if they needed to cancel or rearrange. This enabled the booking team to offer appointments to other people on the waiting list. The department also used a text message service to remind patients of preparation advice they needed to follow prior to attending their appointment. Transport was considered when booking appointments and when patients rang up to change or cancel their transport needs were discussed before rebooking to suit the patient. In line with the Inclusive pregnancy status guidelines (Society of Radiographers, 2021) there was a pregnancy procedure which took account of both cisgender women and transgender men. The service had information leaflets available in languages spoken by the patients and local community. An interpretation was available for patients first language was not English.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

There was extensive information available on the radiology service website (part of public GEH site) about the different modalities and included what to expect at your appointment, preparation (and what happens afterwards) and risks. There was a also a list of all of the staff members and their job roles. This information was also available in Romanian, Polish and Pakistani to meet the needs of the local population. Staff knew how to book interpreters for patients whose first language was not English including people whose first language was British Sign Language.

The service had policies and processes in place to ensure the information which patients received met their needs. During our onsite assessment we saw evidence staff implemented these policies and processes, for example, patients requiring translation and interpretation services, and providing information to patients which met the Accessible Information Standard.

Patients understood they could leave feedback on their appointment by using the QR code on posters displayed in patient areas.

We saw posters containing QR codes requesting patient feedback, these were visible in all patient areas. We also saw posters advertising the patient advice and liaison service (PALS). Staff knew what to do if a patient wanted to make a complaint. The service shared details of a complaint received and the response to it which demonstrated they involved (in this case) family members and valued their input. The response letter demonstrated the service was open and transparent and service leaders apologised when mistakes were made. The letter also demonstrated how the complaint would be shared so it could be learnt from by a wide set of staff.

The service used the friends and family test to get feedback from patients and their families. Patients could also give feedback through the PALS team or directly to staff. If patients made a complaint staff knew what to do including supporting them to make a written complaint to the trust. We saw evidence that people (patients and family) were involved in the investigation process once a complaint had been made. There was a complaints policy for staff to follow. The diversity and equality lead attended the patient forum, and a patient representative was invited to the service’s improvement meetings.

The x-ray service was open 7 days a week 365 days a year. The other modalities were mostly open from 8am until 7pm Monday to Friday and some types of scan and clinics were also held on Saturdays and Sundays. Two of the 15 patients we spoke to told us they had had their previous appointment cancelled. Other patients told us they had not had to wait too long for their scan. One patient said he was seen within an hour of a doctor in the outpatient department requesting their scan. In the 12 months before our inspection the trust performed 153,703 scans or x-rays they cancelled or rearranged 566 appointments. Some patients said they could choose which hospital to be seen in and when they had their scan and at what time. Patients told us they only had to wait a short while before they were called in for their scan. Patients could book some scans through an online web platform. The platform allowed them to see what appointments were available over a range of dates and times. This system also enabled them to look at appointments offered at other trusts. This meant that patients who lived outside the hospital’s ‘catchment’ area could also book scans at the hospital. This meant the patients waiting to be seen were not always local patients and that demand on the service was sometimes as a result of the shorter waiting times than some neighbouring trusts.

The national average for patients waiting over six weeks for a diagnostic test in March 2024 was 22.4% the service performed better than the national average with only 7.9% of patients waiting over 6 weeks. Waiting times were dependent on the urgency of the referral with some internal x-rays and scans being conducted the day they were requested. X-ray and ultrasound had shorter waits than CT and MRI. Patients who had been urgently referred for x-ray and ultrasound were given the next available appointment which was often within a couple of days of the referral being received and vetted. Reporting times varied for each speciality and again could differ dependent on the urgency of the scan. Urgent x-rays and ultrasound scans were typically reported on within less than a week and urgent CT and MRI scans were typically reported on within less than a month. However, some results required specialist reporting which could delay reporting times. A number of service improvement initiatives were either being delivered or were in the planning stages to reduce patient waiting times. This included radiographer led clinics and radiographers being trained to offer specialist interventions to improve treatment times. For example, in interventional radiology the lead radiologist had been trained to put in a peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC). PICC lines are used to deliver medications directly to the large central veins near the heart, they are recommended for some patients who require frequent intravenous access. This meant patients did not have to wait or visit another healthcare provider to have this intervention. Other radiologists had begun PICC line training. The lead IR radiographer was about to be trained in chest port insertion, another intervention that would speed up access to treatment for patients requiring long term treatments that needed intravenous access.

We did not look at Equity in experiences and outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.