Dr Girija Kugapala Also known as E12 Medical Centre

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.

The practice delivered a range of preventative health initiatives, including vaccination and screening programmes. There was a blood pressure monitoring machine with usage guidance to support patients to measure their blood pressure independently.

The practice made health promotion information available in the practice and on its website, including materials in different languages. Information and signposting supported people to access a range of preventative healthcare, such as to support early intervention or screening programmes including HPV vaccination and cancer screening, sepsis awareness and chlamydia testing.

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.

All the practice clinical performance indicators were comparable with or above local and national averages and had met targets including childhood immunisations and cancer screening, except for two specific childhood immunisation uptake indicators and one cervical cancer screening target that were slightly below target. The practice had taken actions to improve including providing information to support people’s informed decision-making, maintaining call and recall systems and using escalation processes for non-responders, where appropriate. Unvalidated data from the practice’s clinical system indicated that at the time of our assessment, the practice performance had met key childhood immunisations and cancer screening clinical performance targets.

There were systems for managing test results and monitoring urgent referrals, including two-week wait (2WW) cancer referrals. Weekly checks were undertaken to identify outstanding referrals, confirm appointments had been arranged and to follow up any delays with providers to support timely follow up.

The practice had systems to ensure reviews for patients with long-term conditions, including diabetes and asthma, and it used completed-cycle clinical audits to monitor and improve the quality of care in line with national guidance. We saw audits had been undertaken to review patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease, and patients prescribed direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), to ensure prescribing was in line with best practice and treatment was optimised according to individual clinical need.

Systems were in place to support appropriate care for patients living with frailty, those with complex needs and people approaching the end of their lives. This included regular reviews and coordinated multidisciplinary support involving health and social care professionals. Unverified practice data reviewed during the assessment showed all 18 patients on the practice's end of life register had received a documented review.

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.