LONGROYDE SURGERY

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. The service provided information people could understand. People received fair and equal treatment and staff were trained to understand people’s needs.

People who used the service were supported to live healthier lives. The practice understood the patient population and they identified where they could make changes to support patients. Patients were able to book both routine and on the day appointments.

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

This service scored 79 (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.

Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care. As part of this assessment, we asked the practice to display a poster for patients to ask them to contribute their views of the practice. Overall, we received 279 submissions, the submissions contained positive commentary about the quality of staff, the ease of getting an appointment and the generally overall supportive and inclusive care. Multiple submissions stated the practice had great communication, and the patients felt the practice went above and beyond for them.

The most recent GP survey showed that 93% of patients felt their needs were met during their last appointment. This was higher than the national and local average of 90%.

The practice provided information in a variety of formats to help patients understand their care, treatment and conditions, as well as having access to interpreters, the provision of longer appointments for patients with complex needs and conducting home visits when needed.

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. Staff told us they were able to offer appointments both on the day for emergencies and in some cases offer on the day appointments for routine care.

The patients could also access social prescribers through the Primary care network (PCN) staff who were able to signpost patients to these services. The PCN pharmacist completed medication reviews.

The practice recorded information, such as whether a patient required a longer appointment, on the patient record home screen. The partner GP was the lead for learning disability services and conducted annual reviews in a way that suited individual’s needs, such as home visits, appointments at quieter times, or partial telephone consultations to minimise the amount of time the patient would need to spend in surgery.

The practice provided care to 2 care homes, one of which had 18 patients registered with the practice. The partner GP had a weekly virtual ward round discussion; this was supported by the PCN care coordinators adding relevant patients to a ledger prior to the meeting.

The practice was part of a health quality check; this was formed by a team of experts by experience who visited the surgery to carry out a review of the practice.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The practice made reasonable adjustments to support communication, this included the use of interpreter services, and larger print documents. The practice noted individuals’ communication needs on their patient records.

The practice had several noticeboards throughout, one of which contained information on dementia awareness. Leaders advised the information on this notice board was topical and changed on a regular basis. The practice regularly updated their website to ensure it was straight forward and easy for patients to navigate.

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.

As part of the assessment we viewed the practices complaints log, we could see that the practice had 5 complaints within the last year. We saw that each of these complaints was managed in line with the practice policy. The patients were provided information for the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO). Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made because of patient feedback, including complaints. The practice website also contained information on how patients could complain.

The practice had an active patient participation group (PPG) who met twice yearly. As part of the assessment, we spoke to a representative of the PPG group as well as collecting feedback from patients. They told us that staff listened to them, and they felt supported.

The service was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Results from the 2024 National GP Patient Surveyin which the practice received 119 completed surveys, this was a completion rate of 42%, showed that 98% of patients found it easy to get through to the practice on the phone, compared to the local average of 47% and national average of 50%.

When looking at how long it took to get an appointment, 98% of patients felt they waited about the right amount of time for their last general appointment, compared to the local result of 68% and the national of 66%.

The practice offered a range of appointments, with GP’s, practice nurses, advanced nurse practitioners, health care assistants. Information from the practice leaflets stated urgent cases would be seen on the day and they aimed to offer most appointments within one working day. When asking people for feedback, people stated how easy it was to get appointments, how they would generally be seen within a day or two, patients praised the speed and efficiency in which they could be seen. The exception to this would be if a patient would like to see a certain member of staff.

Leaders reviewed the number of appointments daily and assessed the waiting time for patients. Depending on demand, GPs would add in extra slots.The premises was wheelchair accessible, the front door was automatic, and the inside door had a bell, so reception were alerted to anybody who needed help. All clinical rooms were on the ground floor. People could access appointments online, over the phone and in person. The practice offered evening appointments and patients could access Saturday appointments at another practice within the Primary care network (PCN). The practice also offered early morning appointments with a GP or practice nurse once per week. The practice offered home visits when needed.

The practice participated in a local initiative that focused on making the practice more accessible for people with both physical and learning disabilities. This initiative consisted of an onsite assessment where people with different disabilities came in and discussed with the practice areas they could improve to help accessibility. This led to the practice changing their waiting room around and adding in additional means for people to notify the practice that they may need help entering the waiting room.

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. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.

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. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.