The High Street Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. 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 Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity. They also offered a range of health checks to relevant people registered at the practice.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves.

The service performed better than the England average in relation to breast and bowel cancer screening programmes. Cervical screening data showed that the service was in line with the England average for the age group 50 to 64 years and just slightly below for the age group 25 to 49 years. The service had taken steps to improve their uptake by offering appointments on a Saturday. They also sent regular reminders and followed up people who had failed to attend screening.

The service had met national targets for childhood immunisation uptake in 3 of the 5 childhood indicators. For the remaining 2 of these indicators the practice achieved 89.3% and 89.1% uptake, just slightly below the national expected uptake of 90%.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.