Yew Tree Medical Centre

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

We assessed all quality statements under this key question. The rating given is Good. The service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. Staff we spoke with or received feedback from demonstrated a caring and patient centred approach to their work. Patient feedback shared directly with CQC was that all staff were caring and understanding of their needs. Staff said they felt well supported in their roles and that their wellbeing at work was considered. The culture of the service was strongly patient centred and staff told us they worked well as a team with a shared priority to provide a high quality and caring service to people.

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.

People said they were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. There were many cards and messages of thanks from patients and the practice sent out text messages to people after each appointment to gain their views. Responses from those surveys were positive. We spoke to 4 patients who were satisfied with the care and compassion received from the practice. The practice shared their Friends and Family Test data which demonstrated that patient satisfaction was excellent with 100% of respondents stating they would recommend the practice. 78% of those who responded to the National GP patient survey said the healthcare professional was good at treating them with care and concern during their appointment. However, this was lower than the local average of 88% and National average of 85%. We observed that people’s privacy and dignity was respected by reception staff. The experience of people who used the service as indicated in the National GP Patient survey showed that people felt listened to and were treated with care. 78% of patients responding to the GP patient survey felt that during their last appointments the healthcare professional was good at listening to them against the local average of 88% and national result of 87%. Staff displayed understanding and a non-judgemental attitude towards people. Staff told us they gave people appropriate and timely information to understand their care, treatment, or condition. Several members of the clinical and nonclinical team were able to speak the languages of their patients and there was information to alert patients that this was available. Where this was not possible, interpretation services were available and longer appointments were offered if required. There were arrangements to ensure confidentiality in the reception area. For example, if people were distressed or wanted to speak to reception staff in confidence they could be taken somewhere private.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. People’s individual needs and equality characteristics were understood, and services were provided to meet these. People’s communication needs were identified and met to enable them to be fully involved in their care, with staff speaking some of the languages of the community and translation services being available when required. Staff knew about equal opportunities for themselves and for patients and staff we spoke with told us how they ensured the individual communication needs of people were communicated by using alerts on the clinical system and accommodated by providing longer appointments if and when required.

The service promoted people’s independence, choice and decision making so that people had control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff were able to help patients and their carers to access advocacy and community based services. A social prescriber was also available to patients of the practice who could opt in to this service if they desired. The result of the National GP patient survey showed that 85% of patients felt that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. People we spoke to were also positive about their involvement in decisions about care and treatment.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. A duty doctor was available each day to support nonclinical staff in care navigation. Staff could offer a range of alternatives to patients to meet their immediate needs including emergency support, and access to mental health crisis teams. People’s needs were usually managed on the day of contact with the service. The remaining were either signposted or offered an appointment in the future to meet their needs. People were directed to the most appropriate person or service to meet their needs and ensure continuity of care where required. Members of the team had been provided with training in basic life support including the signs and symptoms of sepsis. Staff carried out reviews and monitoring for people and altered their medicines when necessary to meet their changing needs. Leaders had reviewed staffing to ensure there were enough clinicians to meet the needs of people.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work. Staff we spoke with felt the practice would benefit from larger meetings where wellbeing could be discussed together.