Park Royal 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

Effective - 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.

We assessed 1 quality statement from this key question. We have combined the scores from this area with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was Good. Our rating for this key question remains Good.

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. The practice had implemented ways to improve uptake for cervical screening and childhood immunisations, although the impact of these changes had yet to be seen.

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.

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.

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.

The service 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. There was a comprehensive programme of clinical audit and quality improvement activity to review the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided.

Whilst the practice team encouraged people to participate in population screening (E.g. the cervical screening programme) and the childhood immunisation programme, the practice was not meeting national screening targets in these areas. The provider was achieving just under 80% childhood immunisation coverage for all routine childhood vaccinations. Performance on cervical screening was below the 80% national target. The service had reviewed these areas in detail, both internally and with external stakeholders, and identified potential barriers for the patient demographic and ways to improve the current systems. They had implemented the suggestions and were monitoring the system over the coming year with the aim of improving uptake and meeting published targets.

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.