Woodside 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 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 practice routinely monitored people’s care and treatment. However, they did not always ensure outcomes were positive and met clinical expectations.

The practice had a system in place to invite eligible patients and families for reviews and preventative healthcare interventions.

The practice was below the minimum target uptake rates (90%) in all categories of childhood immunisations. The practice achieved childhood immunisation uptake rates of 82.6% to 86.0% for children aged 2 and 74.5% for children aged 5. For children aged 1, the immunisation uptake rate was 82.6%.

However, the practice had taken steps to try and improve uptake. In addition to having a recall system in place, patients were offered an appointment with a GP to discuss any concerns and to consider the potential benefits of attending, and the risks associated with not engaging with recommended health interventions. The practice also worked proactively with the Primary Care Network (PCN) to identify children who were overdue immunisations and to improve uptake rates. Dedicated catch-up clinics were in place to meet patient needs, providing additional opportunities to access appointments.

Leaders told us they had developed a range of activities aimed at improving the uptake of childhood immunisations and screening programmes, while providing additional support for families. These initiatives included a wellbeing podcast, a community wellbeing programme, newsletters, and community immunisation events delivered through PCN hubs.

The percentage of women aged 25-49 who had an adequate cervical screening was 66.2% and screening test for women aged 50-64 was 67.4%; both were below the 70% national target.

The practice provided unverified data for 2025/26 and 2026/27. This data showed cervical screening uptake rates of 69% and 57.1% respectively for women aged 25 to 49, and 70.7% and 63.7% respectively for women aged 50 to 64.

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.