East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust

Updated 27 February 2020

East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust is a provider of acute and specialist services that serves a population of 525,000 people across East Sussex. It provides a total of 833 beds in general and acute services at the two district general hospital (Eastbourne District General Hospital and Conquest Hospital, Hastings) and at local community hospitals. In addition, there are 45 Maternity beds at Conquest Hospital, and the midwifery led unit at Eastbourne District General Hospital and 19 Critical care beds (11 at Conquest Hospital, eight at Eastbourne District General Hospital). At Bexhill Hospital the trust provides outpatients, ophthalmology, rehabilitation and intermediate care services. At Rye, Winchelsea and District Memorial Hospital, they provide outpatient and inpatient intermediate care services. The trust also provides a range of community services in the Hastings, Bexhill and Eastbourne areas from a number of community hospitals and clinics as well as at patients’ homes. The services include community adults, community children and families, community inpatients, community end of life care and sexual health clinics. The trust’s main clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) were Eastbourne, Hailsham and Seaford Commissioning Group, Hastings and Rother Clinical Commissioning Group and High Weald, Lewes and Havens Clinical Commissioning Group. However, these have recently merged to form the East Sussex CCG.

Updated 27 February 2020

Our rating of the trust improved. We rated it as good because:

We rated safe, responsive and well-led as good, caring and effective as outstanding. We rated three of the trust’s five services as outstanding and two as good. In rating the trust, we took into account the current ratings of the 13 services not inspected this time.

Updated 27 February 2020

Updated 27 February 2020

Updated 27 February 2020

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

• The service had enough skilled staff to care for patients and keep them safe, although they had vacant posts to be recruited to. Staff had training in key skills although not all staff had attended mandatory updates within the required period. Staff 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 generally kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, and gave patients pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the services and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked exceptionally 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, or if they were not, there were plans in place to ensure they would be.
• 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 usually did not have to wait too long for treatment. Where there were waiting lists, managers had processes to ensure each was considered and prioritised according to urgency. Where appropriate and possible, people on the waiting lists were signposted to other services for more immediate assistance.
• 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, the community and other stakeholders to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

Updated 27 February 2020

Our rating of this service improved. 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, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to useful 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 generally 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 generally 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.