Grey Gable 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 involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this. 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.

The practice made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. 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 a translator to be present. 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. The National GP Patient Survey data found 96% of respondents said their needs were met during their last general practice appointment, which was higher than the local and national averages.

The practice planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. For example, there were regular clinical meetings where guidelines and updates were discussed. The remote clinical searches we undertook of the practice’s clinical records system showed the monitoring of people with long-term conditions were followed in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendations.

The practice worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The practice worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services. Leaders of an aligned care home described excellent working relationships with the allocated GP from the practice. They told us how the practice was responsive to their concerns and attended the home weekly which resulted in excellent care for the patients and families. We saw examples of regular multi-disciplinary team meetings at the practice which included community staff such as district nurses and palliative care nurses.

The practice supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The practice supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. Staff focused on identifying risks to patients’ health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives, patients at risk of developing a long-term condition and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity. Health promotion material was observed in the practice and further information could be found on their website. For example, the practice advertised mental health and bereavement support on their website. The National GP Patient Survey data found 79% of respondents said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at considering their mental wellbeing during their last general appointment, which was higher than local and national averages.

The practice routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Clinical and non-clinical audits were carried out to monitor the quality of care and improve outcomes for patients. The practice regularly took part in research projects. One research project they participated in focused on helping to improve pathways for patients diagnosed with heart failure with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (a condition where the left ventricle of the heart is unable to contract effectively, leading to reduced blood pumping around the body). The practice ensured all 22 patients identified were appropriately coded to help the practice monitor them to allow for early intervention and recognition of any deterioration. It also led to one patient receiving a consultant cardiology review earlier than normal which benefitted their care[SS1]. At the time of our assessment, the latest information from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) showed that the practice met the national target for the number of children immunised against various infectious childhood diseases. The latest information from NHS Digital showed the practice’s uptake of cervical cancer screening was also in line with the national targets. The practice had arrangements in place to monitor people not attending for screening and follow ups.

The practice told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded. Chaperones were available upon request and chaperone posters were on display in the practice.