Romsey Medical Practice

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 looked for evidence the service met people’s needs, and staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Good.

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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of people including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The service understood the potential of health and care needs of people who chose to use their service. People had clear preferences about the treatment they wished to receive. The service maintained professional integrity by taking account of people’s individual needs and preferences while ensuring care was provided in line with current best service and clinical guidance.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to people’s individual needs. Information to promote the uptake of screening and immunisation programmes was available in a range of languages. The service had access to interpreter services. The website also provided detailed information about services and fees that people could access according to their preference.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of feedback from people who used the service. Staff reported effective communication and felt listened to by leaders, with confidence that feedback from both staff and people were acted upon. People’s feedback was consistently responded to, and learning was shared through team meetings, with actions such as a structured “You Said – We Did” approach, demonstrating clear feedback loops and meaningful involvement in service improvement. For example, assuring people attending appointments that there was no rush and can cover multiple concerns in a single appointment.

The service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People could access the service to suit their needs, for example online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were located on the ground floor, with appointments offered Monday to Saturday. The service’s opening hours on a Thursday were extended to 8pm to accommodate those people who worked office hours.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the service as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future treatments. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for future treatments. This information was shared with other services when necessary.