The Parkshot 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.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 82 (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 patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. 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. The results of the National GP Patient Survey showed that 95% of people said they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment, exceeding the average locally and nationally of92% and 91%

The service had an exceptional understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so 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 patient population. The practice reviewed and strengthened its processes for patients requiring ongoing prostate-specific antigen (PSA) monitoring following discharge from secondary care. During this review, the practice identified a need for a more structured approach to monitoring patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) and raised PSA levels and therefore established a dedicated recall system. As part of this work, 33 patients were identified from a cohort of 218 patients with BPH, and a further 98 patients with raised PSA levels were reviewed to ensure appropriate surveillance arrangements were in place. Safety-netting templates were introduced to support timely monitoring, clear documentation and appropriate re-referral where required. This coordinated approach involved clinical, coding and administrative teams working together to maintain oversight of patients requiring surveillance. At the time of inspection, the practice was actively monitoring 75 patients. The practice also shared its learning locally to support improvements in patient safety and continuity of care across other practices. During 2025/26 the practice also worked collaboratively with the Richmond GP Alliance (RGPA) and neighbouring practices to establish a locally delivered spirometry and Fractional exhaled Nitric Oxide (FeNO) testing service. Practice reported that patients benefited from improved local access to diagnostic testing, reduced waiting times, earlier respiratory assessment and diagnosis, and improved support for asthma and COPD management. The service also reduced the need for patients to be referred elsewhere for routine respiratory diagnostics, supporting more joined-up and continuous care. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community, for example, building relationships with community groups to promote the take up of screening programmes. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare provider.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information to promote the take up of screening and immunisation programmes was available in a range of languages. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. 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 had changed as a result. We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The building is purpose built, over three floors. There is step and ramp access to the ground floor waiting area and reception desk. The practice has a lift providing access to all floors.In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example, they reviewed telephone demand and staffing levels, monitored call performance, and promoted alternative access routes such as online consultations and the NHS App. Reception staff received additional training in communication and customer service to improve patient interactions. Regular reviews of patient feedback and discussions with the Patient Participation Group (PPG) helped identify areas for improvement and shape service developments. Progress was monitored through complaints, compliments, telephone performance data, and internal patient surveys including a Patient Participation Group (PPG) survey undertaken between July and November 2025. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. Staff reported that the service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience. For example, the practice had effective arrangements to support patients experiencing homelessness and other complex vulnerabilities. It worked closely with local organisations and voluntary sector partners to reduce barriers to accessing care, promote continuity and improve outcomes. Homeless patients were offered a flexible approach to accessing appointments. Reception staff were aware of the need to discuss these patients directly with the duty GP rather than directing them to online triage. Where appropriate, patients were offered same-day face-to-face appointments, and clinicians dealt with all their needs including carrying out blood test, vaccinations and any other service they may need access to whilst in the practice. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The practice recognised the impact of lengthy waiting times for specialist attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and Autism assessments services and implemented additional support for patients awaiting assessment. Information and support resources were provided at referral, with proactive follow-up offered while patients remained on waiting lists. Patients with severe mental illness were offered comprehensive 60-minute annual reviews covering both mental and physical health needs. Patients with higher support needs were also allocated a named GP to promote continuity of care. The practice also worked collaboratively with mental health services to coordinate care and improve outcomes for patients experiencing mental ill health. 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. The practice held regular multidisciplinary meetings involving the GP palliative care lead, community palliative care team and community matron to proactively review patients and coordinate care. Patients were considered holistically, including their physical, emotional and social needs, and continuity of care was promoted wherever possible. 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.