Siam 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

This key question has been rated as good. We looked for evidence that practice staff met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

People were involved in decisions about their care. The practice provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident practice staff took it seriously and acted on it. The practice was easy to access, and staff worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment and practice staff worked to reduce health and care inequalities. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

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.

Practice staff 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. Feedback from people was positive and people felt staff understood their individual needs. Care home representatives told us care and treatment was based on people’s individual needs and preferences. People and where appropriate, family members and carers were involved in care and treatment decisions.

The practice had arrangements in place to support person centred care. Clinical staff told us during consultations they discussed relevant information, listened to people’s concerns and expectations, identified people’s needs and preferences and agreed a plan of care together which suited the person. Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their condition, were involved in decisions about their care and in planning for their care needs.

The practice was a Veteran friendly accredited GP practice. Staff were aware of the clinical lead for veterans in the practice and an example of support included a fast-track referral for veteran support. There were other staff champions who raised awareness and supported people with a learning disability, mental health and/or neurodiversity needs, those experiencing domestic abuse, and carers.

Practice leaders understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. Partners gave positive feedback regarding the collaborative approach of practice leaders and staff. An example included effective communication and data sharing arrangements to deliver health checks for people with severe mental illness. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare provider, for example with district nurses, for continuity of care for people with wound care needs.

People were allocated a named GP at registration although requests for a specific named GP were accommodated if possible. Systems were in place to ensure people were seen by an appropriate clinician, if needed.People could request to see a GP of their choice, although there may be a longer wait. Feedback from people was positive regarding care provision and continuity of care.

Leaders had a good understanding of the needs of the local population and could refer people, or people could self-refer, to a range of services. These included for example, physiotherapy, wellbeing, sexual health services and Pharmacy First (where people could get clinical advice and treatment from a pharmacist for common minor illnesses). They planned COVID-19 and flu vaccination clinics and visited people who were housebound to administer these.

Stakeholders we received feedback from had no concerns regarding the availability and provision of services.

Practice staff supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People were informed as to how to access their care records. People who provided feedback for this assessment had no specific views or concerns in this area.

Photos of clinicians with their name and role was displayed in the entrance to the practice. New staff to the practice had this information displayed in the waiting room, which included additional information about their background. Arrangements were in place for people to know the name and role of the clinician they were seeing. This included when their appointment was booked and when they checked in. Each clinician’s name and role was written on their consultation room door.

Staff told us information was available to people in different formats, and it would be highlighted on the person’s record if they had any communication or accessibility needs. Examples of information staff had provided to people included easy read and large print formats, leaflets in different languages and specific information on understanding care and treatment options for people living with cancer. Staff also phoned people if they struggled to see text on their phone or texted people who had difficulty hearing. Interpreter services were available for those people whose first language was not English, and for people with a hearing impairment. A hearing loop also available.

The practice had a Facebook page, which had been in use since 2019. Practice information and updates were available, and people could leave comments and reviews. The practice monitored demographic information to enable them to see the audience they were reaching and monitored and responded to engagement. The practice gave examples of positive feedback from people about being kept up to date with issues affecting the practice.

Practice staff made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Information was available at the practice, on their website and on their Facebook page. Practice leaders also engaged with their local community. For example, in June 2025, they attended a health awareness day, for the third year running. Display information included up to date practice news and information, and feedback forms.

Care home representatives told us they were appropriately involved and were listened to when they gave feedback. We received no specific feedback from people regarding their experiences for this quality statement. Practice staff told us people’s feedback was obtained and acted on, for example, practice leaders had worked with their landlord and in June 2025, air conditioning had been installed in the building.

Complaints information was available in the practice and on the practice website. The practice had received 25 complaints from September 2024 to August 2025.We reviewed a sample of complaints and found they had been managed in line with the practice’s policy. Complaints had been acknowledged, investigated in a timely way, people were given an apology, and actions taken in response were shared. People were advised of the contact details of the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman if they wanted to escalate their complaint. Learning from complaints was evident. The practice received compliments from people and these were shared with staff.

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

There was an automatic door fitted to the entrance. All treatment rooms and accessible toilets were available on the ground floor.

Feedback we received from people was positive regarding telephone and online access, and being able to book urgent on the day appointments and appointments in advance.

Feedback from care home representatives was positive regarding access. This included planned weekly visits by a GP, another weekly visit by a Nurse Practitioner and also additional visits for people with urgent needs.Staff could use a health care professionals’ phone number to contact the practice for urgent visit requests.

We reviewed the National GP Patient Survey data, published in July 2025. For the access indicators, experience of contacting your GP practice on this occasion, was in line with the England average and contacting your GP practice by phone, was tending towards a positive statistical variation compared with the England average.

Appointments were available on weekdays, between 8am to 6:30pm. Extended hours appointments were available until 8pm on 1 weekday and from 1pm to 5pm on Saturdays. People could access the service to suit their needs, for example online, in person and by telephone. The practice was responsive to the needs of people who were too ill or physically incapable of travelling to the practice and offered home visits. Staff told us people with the most urgent needs had their care and treatment prioritised. Leaders made regular checks to ensure appropriate triage and prioritisation decisions were made. The practice had a duty GP available every day for advice and support, as necessary.

There were arrangements in place to review appointment utilisation data, to maximise the use of appointment times and ensure unused appointment times supported other clinical work or staff learning. Cloud based telephony had been introduced in August 2023 which staff fed back had gone well. A sample of telephone calls were listened to every week to ensure quality and safety was maintained.

The practice had a Facebook page, where information was shared with people to help manage demand for appointments, and to access appropriate care for their needs. This included arrangements during a change to the usual practice opening hours, for example for staff training or a bank holiday.

Practice leaders knew the demographics of the people registered at the practice which included for example, age, diversity, deprivation and economic factors which impacted the health needs of their population. Leaders and staff actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. We received no specific feedback from people regarding their experiences for this quality statement.

Arrangements were in place for staff to engage with people who were more likely to experience inequalities in health and outcomes. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Staff told us they respected and appreciated people's backgrounds and cultural values.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. To raise awareness of Learning Disability week, the practice posted a photo of the Nurse Practitioner who specialised in learning disability on their Facebook page. Information about them, and how they can support people with a learning disability was included, to encourage engagement.

The practice complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, which included avoiding discrimination and having regard for the needs of people with different protected characteristics.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they had enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Care home representatives were satisfied with the support from the practice in supporting people to plan for their future and in meeting their current end of life care needs. We received no specific feedback from people regarding their experiences for this quality statement.

The practice maintained a register of people with living with cancer and people with palliative care needs. They had systems in place to support and review people, which included people who were housebound, and staff worked in partnership with other organisations. A GP and care coordinator supported this area of work. Regular multidisciplinary (MDT) team meetings where people who were receiving palliative care were discussed and reviewed, as appropriate. Minutes of meetings we reviewed confirmed this. Arrangements were in place for discussions and actions to be added to people’s clinical record.

The practice had recently completed a Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) and ReSPECT (Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) audit. They planned to review their process with an external specialist to identify if any improvements could be made. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, which included cardiopulmonary resuscitation. These had been completed appropriately following national guidelines and information was shared with other services when necessary.