Nettlebed 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

The service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

This key question has been rated as good.

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 were at the centre of their care and treatment choice. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to manage their conditions.

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.

We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. This included district nurses, hospital consultants and social care teams.

The recent patient survey results indicated that 62% of the respondents had enough support from local services or organisations in the last 12 months to help manage their long-term conditions or illnesses. This was below the local average of 71% and national average of 69%.

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

The practice had access to interpreter services, including language interpretation services.

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. For example, the recent patient survey results suggested that 96% of respondents were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during

their last general practice appointment. This was above the local average of 92% and national average of 91%.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. However, some actions which required outcomes from a GP were not always completed. Therefore, some patient complaints were not fully resolved.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The practice enabled patients to submit routine and urgent appointment requests via phone, online and in person. The recent patient survey results indicated that 77% of respondents find it easy to contact this GP practice using their website. This was more than the local and national average of 51%. In addition, 96% of the respondents said they knew what the next step would be after contacting their GP practice. Compared to the local average of 84% and national average of 83%.

Patients who provided feedback directly to CQC were positive about access to services.

Staff and leaders understood to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. The triage system helped ensure patients were offered the most appropriate appointment based on their assessed needs.

The practice worked in provider with other services within the PCN (Primary Care Network). Extended access appointments were available for patients within the PCN, outside of the core hours.

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.

The practice held registers for a number of different patient groups, this included those with learning disabilities, mental health conditions and also those on end-of-life care.