Parkway

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area.

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.

This section was partly assessed using findings that are applicable to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

The service received positive feedback from service users in experience surveys about the service. Comments included “I attended here for a gastroscopy and a colonoscopy and was very impressed with the service offered. This includes both the nurses and the consultant. I was very nervous about the gastroscopy but was reassured and the procedure went well.”

This section was partly assessed using findings that apply to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

The service monitored waiting times for appointments. The most recent experience reports for Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 2024 -2025 indicated that there were no service users who waited over 6 weeks for an appointment following their referral. Any delays in appointment times were mostly due to service users needing to make rearrangements. If they cancelled their appointment, staff in the service promptly made contact to rearrange their booking. Service users did not have to wait long in the clinic after arriving for their appointment, as confirmed in another comment received: “The longest wait I had was about five minutes, which was probably due to my early arrival. In fact, I was seen earlier than my scheduled appointment time.”

This section was partly assessed using findings that apply to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

Service users received full information about the different type of endoscopy procedure that they were due to have. Information leaflets were comprehensive and available in different languages, where this was required. A range of information was available on the provider’s website about all aspects of the procedure. This included a video of the clinic environment, including a ‘walk through’ presentation of the endoscopy suite, with clear commentary about what happened at each stage of the appointment. Service users we spoke with said they were fully informed and had opportunities to ask questions about the procedure they were having.

Staff shared a report for service users’ GPs following their procedures, with a copy shared with the service users themselves for their own reference.

This section was partly assessed using findings that apply to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

Service users we spoke with were aware of how to raise any concerns or complaints to the service. The latest experience report for Quarter 4 2024-2025 indicated that of a total 1519 service users seen in the gastroenterology service, 2 complaints had been received. Both complaints were fully investigated through the provider’s complaints procedure, and only partially upheld in aspects relating to communication, with the clinical components of the complaints not substantiated.

Experience reports also noted that “in services involving more invasive procedures, such as Gastroenterology, specifically Endoscopy, often carry a higher risk profile, which can increase the likelihood of dissatisfaction or concern even when care has been clinically appropriate. The absence of any significant change in the distribution of complaints suggests stability in service quality across all areas, with variations largely attributable to the nature and complexity of care provided”.

This section was assessed using findings that apply to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

This section was assessed using findings that apply to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

This section was partly assessed using findings that apply to the whole Parkway site, which are included in the appropriate section of the surgery report.

The service had completed a capacity review based on referral rates and service demand and currently had capacity for the forecasted growth.