Binbrook 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

We looked for evidence the service met people’s needs, and staff treated people equally and without discrimination. 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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The service performed better than national averages in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or through the service’s website. For example, 90% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of this service as being good, compared to a national average of 75%. Feedback we received from patients as part of this assessment was also positive about access, with patients telling us, “Appointments are always available promptly”, and “never have a problem getting through on the phone”. In response to feedback from people who used the service, staff had made changes to improve access. A new telephone system was in place, and the appointment system had been reviewed to further improve access. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and an interpretation service was available should it be needed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not have access to the internet. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was positive.

Staff told us about additional work they had carried out with learning disability patients to enable them to access health services without anxiety. This included home visits which then progressed to visits to the practice without treatment to enable them to become comfortable in a healthcare environment. This had resulted in patients being able to attend the practice and health appointments elsewhere with calmness and confidence.

During the annual flu clinic, the practice had invited patients to complete a questionnaire to gather information about any additional needs and as a result had increased the number of identified carers on their register by 10% which enabled them to offer additional support and flexibility to this group of patients where necessary. The practice gave an example of how a young carer had been identified and appropriately supported.

Veterans had also been identified through completion of the questionnaires available at the flu clinic which enabled the practice to offer additional support where necessary.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.