Upper Thames Medical - The Park Surgery and Lechlade Medical

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 assessed all quality statements in the responsive key question. This is the first inspection of this service since its registration with CQC. At this assessment, we rated the key question as: Good. We observed evidence which demonstrated the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Requests for appointments were allocated based on clinical needs. The service understood their patient population. Changes were identified to improve the service where required.

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.

Staff treated people as individuals and with respect. They offered care and treatment with a person-centred approach and re-direction to other services that best met the person’s needs. Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of people including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. For example, people’s care records indicated if they lived with a learning disability which indicated to the staff reviewing their appointment request, they may require an extended appointment to discuss their health care needs.

Staff and leaders worked together in a multi-disciplinary approach to ensure people received the appropriate support at the right time. Some staff told us they had completed specialist training and had additional responsibilities linked to their role. For example, one GP had training and experience in managing and supporting patients experiencing frailty. The practice 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 had a system which alerted staff to any specific safety or clinical needs. The service made reasonable adjustments when patients found it hard to access the service. The practice’s website contained a variety of information to support people. For example, how to access mental health and wellbeing support.

The practice supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Staff told us they provided people with advice and information in a way which helped them to understand their health needs. Where people’s needs could not be met by the service, staff referred them to the appropriate service. There was a system for staff to access interpretation services to support people who did not have English as a first language.

Staff demonstrated their understanding of the importance of listening to people during their appointment. They helped patients to be involved in decisions about care and treatment. We reviewed a sample of complaints received by the service and found they had been responded to and acted upon in a timely way in line with the provider’s complaint’s procedure. Complaints were reviewed regularly, and learning was shared amongst staff to drive continuous improvement. Information about how to complain was readily available via the practice website. Complaints were listened to and responded to appropriately and acted upon to improve the quality of care.

The practice made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The practice undertook patient surveys to review the quality of care provided. Although the service did not question patients directly about equity in access, most patients were satisfied with the overall service. Staff had access to guidance to support decision making. Staff and leaders explained how they understood the needs of the local population and had developed the service in response. Staff told us they provided opportunities and support for different groups of the patient population to overcome health inequalities. For example, the practice works with other local organisations, charities and the voluntary sector, to address this.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff had completed training in equality, diversity, and inclusion. The service had processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

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. We looked at 6 patient records that were coded as having a do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decision documented in their care record, and all demonstrated that decisions were made in line with relevant legislation. End of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which considered the needs of those whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. People’s wishes were recorded on their patient record which were available to local health providers who may need to access them.