Mallard Medical Practice

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 involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this. However, there were some gaps in the way the practice recalled patients for regular reviews. This placed patients at risk, as changes to their long-term condition may not be identified as they were not invited in to have a review. The practice was aware of this but plans to address this were at an early stage. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs with them. Feedback from people using the service was positive. People felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. Reception staff were aware of the needs of the local community. Reception staff used digital flags within the care records system to highlight any specific individual needs, such as the requirement for longer appointments or for a translator to be present. Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. However, there were gaps in some areas. For example, where patients experienced an acute exacerbation of asthma, they were not always followed up within a reasonable timescale to check the response to prescribed medicine. Not all patients living with chronic kidney disease were being monitored and followed up by the GP. Not all patients living with hypothyroidism had timely thyroid function tests. The GP Partners told us they had identified the approach to recall for patients with long term conditions was not effective since the change over to a new clinical system. They planned further training in this for the practice and they knew they needed to implement effective arrangements. Plans to address this were at an early stage. The provider had effective systems to identify people with previously undiagnosed conditions. Staff could refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

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.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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.