Laurbel Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

Feedback received directly by CQC from patients highlighted that patients were respected and valued as individuals. Feedback consistently described the service and its staff as kind, considerate and empathetic. Results from the National GP Patient Survey and Friends and Family test were very positive. We observed staff treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion.

This service scored 90 (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 was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion. Feedback from those who used the service was overwhelmingly positive, staff were consistently praised for being respectful and compassionate. Patients also reported that their privacy and dignity were well maintained throughout their interactions with the practice.

The practice gathered Friends and Family scores, which consistently reflected high levels of patient satisfaction. Feedback from patients was shared with staff to encourage and reinforce good practice. The practice worked on addressing the small number of negative comments received and used these as an opportunity for learning and improvement.

Results from the National GP Patient Survey consistently scored higher than both the local and national averages. Notably, 95% of patients felt their needs were met during their last general practice appointment. This was above the local average and national average of 90%. Similarly, 90% of patients found the reception and administrative team at this GP practice helpful, compared to the local average of 84% and national average of 83%.

We observed reception staff respect patients’ privacy and dignity. Staff across the practice demonstrated an understanding and non-judgmental attitude, they provided patients with timely, clear information about their care. Additionally, processes were in place to ensure confidentiality in the reception area; for example, distressed patients or those wanting a private space were offered a separate space to speak confidentially with staff.

More than 70 patients shared positive experiences of the practice directly with the Care Quality Commission. Patients told us the practice was “supportive on all occasions” and “I am really pleased with the service and compassion I received.”

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care.

We found that the practice actively maintained a list of patients with learning difficulties and regularly maintained contact with them to support them. Feedback we received from patients told us they were treated as individuals, this included praise like “Drs and nurses always gives you time to explain your symptoms” and “they are friendly and explain everything to you”.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services. Administration staff were able to support patients and assist them to obtain support in the community. Equipment was provided to support patients independence such as a hearing loop. The practice had also purchased its own wheelchair, which was popular and requested by patients with mobility issues when required.

Results from the National GP Patient Survey showed that 75% of patients were offered a choice of time or day when they last tried to make a general practice appointment. This was considerably higher than both the local and national average of 53%.

The service was exceptional in how they listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff told us this was working well and if they had any concerns about a patient and there were no appointments left on the day, they could discuss this with the clinicians who would assess the patient’s needs. We observed staff were very attentive to patients needs and assisted them positively.

Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams. There were information leaflets available for patients. Staff had access to flow charts and quick guides to assist them also.

The National GP Patient Survey showed that 86% of patients described their experience of contacting their GP practice as good. This was considerably higher than the local average of 69% and local average of 67%. Results were also higher than local and national averages for patients knowing what the next step would be within two days of contacting their GP practice.

Feedback received by CQC highlighted several positive cases of patients being able to see or speak with a clinician quickly. There was also a lot of positive feedback around staff attitudes and how understanding and caring they were.

The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

All staff told us they were valued by leaders. They were positive about the support they had received and about the positive culture that was instilled in the practice. All the staff told us leaders were approachable, supportive and friendly and there was a positive work environment. This was reflected in a settled workforce that did not have a high turnover of staff.

We saw evidence on how staff were consulted on changes happening at the practice. This included asking for staff input on an extension of the building that was due to be completed shortly. Through staff feedback the practice was updating its uniform policy.