Patients were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the trust had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. Provision of suitable medicine storage was in place and security had improved. There were regular audits of compliance and staff reported and escalated issues promptly. Patients knew what the medicines were for and received them at regular intervals.

Patients were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. One patient said: “Staff are lovely, it’s very calm. The matron does a good job, checking on things all the time.” Another patient said: “I have no complaints at all. I was worried when I came in but they have had a calming influence.”

Staff received timely appraisals, were informed of developments and consulted on any proposed improvements. There were a range of meetings and mechanisms whereby staff received information about developments, met members of the trust board and shared their views.

Written information about the complaints process and the patient information and liaison service (PILS) was easily available. Patients we spoke with were familiar with this and knew how to raise a concern, should they need to. Complaints were responded to in a detailed and timely way. Information from complaints was used to help make improvements to the service.

We did not speak to people who used this service as part of this review. We looked at a random sample of medical records. This was to check that current practice ensured that no treatment for the termination of pregnancy was commenced unless two certificated opinions from doctors had been obtained.

Summary of comments made by people who use the services: (Full comments are included in the second section of this report under each outcome area pages 10-40)

During our visit on 9 February 2011, we talked to patients at the Leicester General Hospital. On the whole the patients we spoke to were positive about their experiences of care and treatment at the hospital. Patients reported that staff were respectful and focused on meeting their personal care needs. Patients felt they were treated with dignity and respect. They also stated that they were given information about procedures including reasons for needing to reschedule or cancel them. Patients told us that the risks and benefits of different care and treatment options had been explained to them.

We found that the trust asks patients for their views and experiences of care on a regular basis.

Patients told us that they thought the general fabric of the hospital was good; they also said that cleanliness of the ward environment was good.

Patents reported that the staff explained and provided sufficient information on the medication that they were required to take whilst in hospital.

Overall, the majority of these comments reflected well on the hospital; patients we spoke to confirmed that they were looked after well and generally had their needs met. However, as was the case at Glenfield Hospital, some patients thought that the nurses always appeared to be very busy; some questioned whether there should be more staff. Some of the comments made from patients spoken with include the following:

“The nurses are overworked, sometimes you need to wait to get things done but you need to be patient, when you ring the bell they come pretty quickly but you may need to wait a while for them coming back”.

“They are so busy here the nurses and the carers, but they are very good and make time for you”.

“Depending how busy they are depends on how quickly they answer the bell”.

“You know they’re short staffed, but that’s like everywhere else”.

Our rating of services stayed the same. We rated it as requires improvement

A summary of this hospital appears in the overall summary above