Pine House Rehabilitation Unit

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

This means we looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. We assessed one quality statement from this key question. Patients gave generally good feedback about staff on the wards. Patients had opportunities to be give feedback about their wards through community meetings and via feedback forms. The occupational therapy team conducted surveys with patients around the work that they did in the service and any specific activities, goals or areas that the team could support patients with.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Kindness, compassion and dignity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

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.

Patients that we spoke to during the assessment generally gave positive feedback about their experiences of the care and treatment provided by the service. Patients stated that staff treated them fairly and were respectful towards patients. Patients were able to give feedback through community meetings and feedback forms. We saw that patients were able to use these forums to suggest improvements or raise any concerns they may have. Advocacy services were available within the service and information was given to patients on how they could access these services. Staff and managers explained that patients were encouraged to contact and utilise advocacy services where appropriate. The service conducted a yearly patient survey and a yearly family and friend survey. The patient survey for 2024 had been completed but the data was still to be analysed. Managers noted the family and friend survey was due to be sent out. At the time of the assessment, the service did not have any regular family or carer groups but did state that families would be able to attend multi-disciplinary team meetings in line with the patient’s wishes.

Managers noted that a feedback sheet was available for patients to prepare for any meetings such as ward rounds. This was to ensure that they could have time to consider any areas they may wish to discuss or raise during the meetings. The new hospital manager explained that, when they started in post, a priority was ensuring that staff were spending 1:1 time with patients and put expectations in place as to how often these should be occurring. Managers noted that they were encouraging staff to think about utilising different supportive approaches to 1:1s.

We observed some positive interactions between staff and patients during the assessment. Where some patients had some potential difficulties with understanding staff, staff took the time to explain to patients and would offer encouragement and prompts where necessary. Where staff members were not sure if they could undertake a certain action on behalf of a patient, they asked for advice from a senior colleague who explained what actions the staff member should take and who they could liaise with.

The service held fortnightly patient community meetings which patients could attend to give feedback about the service and their experiences of care and treatment. The meetings followed a standard agenda which covered the environment, food, what was going well in the service, what could be better and any new ideas that patients may have for the service or activities. The service conducted yearly patient surveys. The data from the 2024 survey was not available at the time of the assessment. The previous survey had been carried out in July 2023 at which the majority of patients responded positively to all of the questions asked. The survey results also recorded additional feedback from the respondents. The occupational therapy team also conducted surveys with patients around the work that they did in the service and any specific goals or areas that the team could support patients with. The service had plans to appoint a patient representative to contribute to and attend governance meetings however, at the time of the assessment, the service had not been able to recruit to this position.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

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.