The Ridge 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

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.

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.

The practice’s cervical screening uptake rate as of June 2024 was 55.8% for women aged 25–49 and 65.2% for women aged 50–64.

The practice had reviewed its cervical screening process and identified areas where improvement was required. This led to changes in their recall and follow‑up processes. The practice took steps to encourage patients to attend for cervical screening, including having a dedicated team member whose role was to increase screening uptake within the practice; this included bowel and breast screening.

The practice provided further information about how they offered cervical screening in enhanced access clinics, opportunistically during nurse clinics, and if agreed to this could also be carried out during general women’s health appointments with the Lead GP for women’s health.

The practice had implemented a 5‑phase project to increase uptake of cancer screening. Phase 1 focused on improving cervical screening rates, followed by a second phase to expand this work into bowel and breast screening. Further phases aimed to strengthen physical and digital communication, increase outreach and engagement, and established a phase for review and continuous improvement.

We saw that the practice’s current (unverified and unpublished) data showed that as of January 2026, over 94% of eligible patients had been screened.

The provider used clinical audits to monitor and improve patient care. For example, a re-audit into thyroid function testing, which showed a decrease in patients who had not received the required monitoring. The practice evidenced two‑cycle audits and provided an audit plan. Audit results were discussed in clinical meetings held on alternate days to support greater attendance. All clinicians received minutes, slides or handouts by email, and these documents were also accessible on the shared computer drive.

We found 4 out of 5 child immunisation performance indicators were between 85% and the 90% minimum. The indicator for children aged 5 who had received their second dose of the Measles, Mumps and Rubella (MMR) vaccine was 75%. The practice explained that they had a designated Immunisation Lead whose role was to increase immunisation uptake. Nurse Safeguarding Leads supported conversations to ensure informed decision‑making. Parental declinations were recorded and updated annually or more frequently if required. The provider informed us that measures were in place to escalate concerns regarding children who were not vaccinated or who did not attend planned appointments.

Patient responses to the National GP Patient Survey(2025) indicated that they felt supported by local services, with 74% reporting they had enough support from local services and organisations to help manage their long‑term conditions or illnesses. This was above the local average of 70% and the national average of 69%.

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.