White Lodge 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 that the service met people’s needs, and that 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 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Then practice assured people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and care plans were developed together with people in response to their changing needs. The care plans at the practice were written by GPs. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their conditions and involved in the planning and decision-making process.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities. Care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its population. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community, for example, undertaking black and Caribbean health training to help fully address the needs of this area of the patent population. The practice also provided appointments at the end of sessions for those patients who may need extra time or a quieter environment. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare providers such as health visitors, frailty nurses and mental health teams.

The practice ensured that the patient population had access to information that was beneficial to their health. The practice provided access to interpreters, British Sign Language interpreters and a hearing loop. The staff listened to the patients to get information that assisted in providing care and signposted them to the right services where necessary. The practice had a dedicated member of staff who acted as the NHS App champion to help those patients who struggled with the technology. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

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 changed as a result. The practice had an active PPG who met regularly to engage with the practice staff. We saw that complaints were managed in line with the practice policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback.

The service did not always make sure that people could access care, support and treatment needed when they needed it.

The National GP Patient Survey data (01/24 – 03/24) showed that 55% of respondents were positive about the overall experience of contacting the practice which was below the expected national average of 67%. Forty-nine percent of respondents responded positively to how easy it was to contact the practice on the phone which equalled to the national expected average of 49%. The practice had an action plan in place to improve on the results. This included the implementation of a a Total Triage system, which had resulted in less pressure on the telephone system and reduced call volumes and waiting times. Patients were encouraged to make appointments using an app. A console was available in the waiting room to enable those who do not have access to use the facility at the practice. However, some patients fed back that the new system was confusing and made it harder to make an appointment as they did not know how to effectively use the system.

Reception staff had received care navigation training to direct patient queries to the correct healthcare professional.

More appointments had been made available with on-site first contact professionals such as ANP (Advanced Nurse Practitioners), Clinical Pharmacists and Physiotherapists that freed up appointments with GPs allowing more continuity of care for those patients that needed it.

Treatment rooms were mainly on the first floor, however a treatment room was available on the ground floor for those patients who needed it. Access to the first floor was by either lift or stairs. An automatic door had been fitted to the entrance.

Staff were trained on equality and diversity, and patients were known to staff which helped to provide the right information and support to meet their needs. Feedback from patients using the service to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) was positive. Staff were described as very kind and helpful. Priority appointments were available for patients who needed them. Patients who were eligible were encouraged to attend health checks and reviews. Continuous training helped the practice to stay relevant to people’s needs and provide patients with support.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The practice worked collaboratively with other healthcare providers to support patients with end-of-life care. The patients were added to a high-risk register and district nurse were actively involved in their care. Care records or information was shared through the clinical system. The Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) records were reviewed regularly by the practice and updated according to the Mental Capacity Act. Care plans were updated according to the changing needs of the patient. The wishes of the patient were respected.