Martlesham Heath Surgery

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 is the first assessment for this service due to the legal entity change of this provider. This key question has been rated as good. We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

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.

Practice staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us they were treated with respect and dignity, and confirmed their privacy and confidentiality was maintained. We reviewed indicators in the National GP Patient Survey data, published in July 2025. The practice percentages were in line with the England average for the 4 indicators which related to kindness, compassion and dignity.

Arrangements were in place to promote people’s privacy. During the site visit we observed staff to be friendly and helpful with people at the reception desk and when supporting people by telephone. Notices were displayed to ask people to keep the waiting room door closed to support the privacy of people at the reception desk. Clinical rooms had privacy curtains. All staff were aware of the importance of people’s confidentiality and gave examples of how this was maintained. Staff also gave examples of how they treated people with kindness, respect and compassion.

Practice staff treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, culture and protected characteristics.

We reviewed the National GP Patient Survey data, published in July 2025. The indicator for people being involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment was in line with the England average. Feedback from people demonstrated they were confident that staff understood their individual needs.

Staff and leaders told us that people’s individual needs and preferences were understood and reflected in their care, treatment and support. An example was given of proactive support to a vulnerable person. Staff also gave examples of reasonable adjustments in place for people, for example longer appointments. Arrangements were in place to identify and support people who were digitally excluded, and staff had received training to support them with accessing digital systems, or undertake this on their behalf.

Staff were required to undertake specific training to improve their own knowledge and understanding of how to support people. The majority of staff had completed training on equality and diversity and learning disability and autism awareness training relevant to their role. Following the site visit, relevant staff had been advised of training which needed to be completed and given dedicated time to complete it, or were planned to book on the next course. For level 1, practice leaders advised this would be completed by the end of August 2025, and for level 2, when the next course was made available. Practice leaders had previously engaged with the Integrated Care Board (ICB) regarding access to this training.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Feedback we received was positive with people’s individual needs and choices being considered during care and treatment decisions.

Staff supported people to make informed decisions about their care and treatment, and in some cases with their carers, when appropriate. This included discussions about care and treatment options to decide on what would work best. There was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and treatment. Staff helped people and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services, as appropriate.

There were systems and processes in place to promote people’s independence and control over their care and treatment. Information was available in the practice and on the practice website which advised people how to access a range of support groups and organisations, which included wellbeing and drug and alcohol support.People could self-refer to a range of services using links from the practice website.

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. People who provided feedback for this assessment advised they were able to get an on the day or urgent appointment if needed.

Staff knew how to respond to people’s immediate needs and how to recognise when urgent help or support was required. Staff told us about systems and training in place to support this, which included guidance and training on sepsis,the use of an alert button on the computer system, and the availability of emergency medicines and equipment. The practice had a duty clinician available every day to respond to people’s immediate needs, review urgent requests and support as necessary.There was a protocol for managing emergencies and a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs, including mental health needs, had access to services.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care.

Leaders had taken steps to meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as lone working and home visit arrangements. Leaders recognised the potential impact of some of the changes on staff wellbeing and had regular ‘check in’s’ with staff for support. The majority of staff felt supported by leaders and could approach them at any time for advice and guidance. Staff gave examples of support they had received, for example when their workload was high and working hours flexibly to attend Friday prayers. Staff had access to wellbeing and mental health support through the provider’s insurance company and information had been shared with staff on how to access this. The practice supported staff with professional development and career progression.