Gorton Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this.

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

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.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Feedback from people using the service was positive. People felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. Reception staff were aware of the needs of the local community. Reception staff used digital flags within the care records system to highlight any specific individual needs, such as the requirement for longer appointments or for a translator to be present. Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews.

Records reviewed demonstrated that patients' needs were assessed in line with recognised pathways and guidance. Staff described systems for identifying and prioritising patients whose health may be deteriorating, ensuring they received timely assessment and treatment. Clinical records reviewed supported that care and treatment decisions were based on best practice guidance.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was provided in line with current guidance.

Patients with long-term conditions were routinely monitored and recalled where required. Practice searches showed oversight of patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, thyroid disease and asthma. Patients with elevated blood glucose levels were recalled and reviewed, and the practice worked collaboratively with community diabetes services to support improved outcomes. The practice benchmarked prescribing performance and had taken action to improve antimicrobial prescribing and review the use of higher risk medicines.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The practice worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services.

The practice worked collaboratively with other healthcare professionals and services to coordinate people's care and treatment. Staff described effective information-sharing arrangements with secondary care providers, out-of-hours services and community teams, supported through shared access to patient records where appropriate. This helped promote continuity of care and supported timely decision-making when patients moved between services.

Multidisciplinary team meetings were held regularly and provided opportunities for staff to discuss safeguarding concerns, patients with complex needs and those who may be vulnerable or at risk of deterioration.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The practice took a proactive approach to supporting people to live healthier lives and reduce their risk of developing avoidable complications from long-term conditions. Staff used clinical searches, recall systems and structured reviews to identify patients who may benefit from additional monitoring, treatment or support. For example, the practice undertook a quality improvement project focused on patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Through staff training, structured recalls, pharmacist-led reviews and collaboration with community pharmacies, the practice improved monitoring for this patient group. Staff also worked with patients to improve their understanding of their condition and supported shared decision-making about treatment options.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Childhood immunisation uptake remained below national targets for some indicators, including MMR vaccinations. Leaders demonstrated a good understanding of the factors affecting uptake within their local population, particularly among migrant families and underserved groups. The practice had undertaken a quality improvement project to increase MMR uptake, which included multilingual recall systems, direct booking into catch-up clinics, opportunistic vaccination supported by electronic alerts, and staff training. The project resulted in an increase in vaccination uptake among children identified as requiring MMR vaccination and helped the practice identify further barriers to engagement.

The service always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

Feedback obtained indicated that patients were treated with kindness and respect. Patients described reception and clinical staff as friendly and reported positive relationships with their clinicians. Arrangements were in place to maintain privacy and confidentiality, including private consultation rooms and secure office spaces away from patient areas.

National GP Patient Survey data was in line with national averages. For example, 83% of respondents felt they were treated with care and concern during their last appointment.

Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and 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 support.