The Densham Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Under the RESPONSIVE key question, we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At the previous inspection 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.

Patient feedback through the National GP Patient survey results in 2024 showed patients felt their needs were met during their appointments (85% of responded positively compared to 91% across the Integrated Care System (ICS) and 90% in England). In the survey, 86% of patients indicated that they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during appointments. This was close to the local and national averages for England.

Leaders told us they had implemented systems and processes to ensure people were supported in a person-centred way. There were arrangements in place to ensure people with protected characteristics were supported appropriately. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made reasonable adjustments where necessary to improve access, experience and outcomes.

Staff and leaders told us that they provided care and treatment in a way that met patient’s needs using a person-centred approach. There were several schemes and services provided across the Primary Care Network (PCN) that supported patients of the practice such as physiotherapy, social prescribers and pharmacist support. Out of hours services were provided through the federation of local GP providers. The out of hours service could access patients’ records to ensure continuity.

We saw evidence of a succession plan in the event of the departure of a senior partner. This was aimed at ensuring minimum disruption to the operations of the practice and provided a smooth transition plan that guaranteed continuity of service for the patients. The practice was in the process of going through a merging process with a neighbouring practice

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. There were clear policies and procedures to ensure continuity in people’s care and treatment which were delivered using person centred approach that recognised the needs and preferences of different people, including those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act and those at most risk of a poorer experience of care.

Patient feedback obtained through the National GP Patient survey results in 2024 showed patients felt involved in decisions about their care and treatment and that healthcare professionals had the information they needed during their last general practice appointment. During the assessment, we reviewed the feedback received by the practice from patients. Most of this feedback focused on challenges on accessing appointments, views on practice staff and practice procedures.

Staff and leaders told us that the service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. For example, they provided support in the form of sign language translators, braille, easy read format and interpreters.

There were policies and procedures for staff to follow to ensure people had information that was tailored to individual needs. This included making reasonable adjustments which ensured information was accessible to meet people’s communication needs. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language.

In the recent GP national survey, carried out between January and March 2024, most of the respondents said staff at the practice were good at listening to them during appointments. In the same survey, 97% of respondents felt the healthcare professional had all the information they needed about them during general practice appointments. We also reviewed the feedback received by the practice. Most of this feedback focused on patients' challenges in accessing appointments, practice procedures and staff.

The practice was aware of concerns that people found it difficult to contact the practice via telephone and were in the process of updating their telephony systems. Although this process had already started there were delays in progressing due to external factors. The practice was working alongside the local Integrated Care Board (ICB) to overcome this.

There were processes and policies in place that made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. People were supported in a person centred way which focused on the person’s needs and aspirations.

Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider and the GP national survey indicated that people found it difficult to access this practice by telephone, website or the NHS app. According to the GP national survey carried out in January to February 2024, 32% of patients found it easy to get through to this GP practice by phone. This was below the local average which was 52% and the national average at 50%. However, feedback from patients also showed that once they gained access to the practice, most respondents found the service good.

Staff and leaders were aware of the challenges patients were facing in contacting the practice via the website, telephone and the NHS application. As a result, they were working on improving their telephony service. They told us that this process had faced delays due to external factors but remained ongoing. People were given support to overcome barriers to ensure equal access. Services were designed to make them accessible and timely for people who were most likely to have difficulty accessing care. For example, the practice was veteran friendly and utilised social prescribers to provide appropriate support to this population group where required.

There were processes in place to ensure people could access support from the practice. This involved removing barriers to accessing care by providing reasonable adjustments where appropriate. For example, homeless people could register with the practice without the need to provide proof of address. Measures were also in situ to support people to receive information in accessible formats such as easy read and British Sign Language. There were processes in place for providing support to housebound patients which resulted in home visits.

Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to GP patient survey, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made reasonable adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. support equity in people’s experience and outcomes.

The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people. For example, homeless people could register with the practice using the practice address for any subsequent correspondence. People with learning disabilities or multiple conditions were offered longer appointments to ensure sufficient consultation time. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service and utilised this information to improve service and outcomes for patients.

We reviewed the feedback received by the practice (through complaints, compliments, NHS friends and family results) as well as information from the GP patient survey results. Generally, the feedback did not relate to this quality statement.

Staff and leaders told us that patients were supported using a person-centred approach. This approach ensured that people were involved in making decisions about how they wanted to be cared for including planning for their future care where possible. Care plans were reviewed timely to ensure information remained relevant to the patient’s wishes and needs.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. There were systems and processes to ensure people who may be approaching the end of their life were identified (including those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act and people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable). This information was shared with other services and staff.