Plumstead Health Centre PMS

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 requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good.

This service scored 63 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. 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 longer appointments or for a translator to be present. Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. Clinical staff used templates when conducting care reviews to support the review of people’s wider health and wellbeing. Staff could refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

The provider’s systems for identifying people with previously undiagnosed conditions were not always effective. Patients with a diagnosis of diabetes were not always correctly recorded as such. This meant that patients did not always receive the appropriate monitoring and support for their condition and we were not assured that all patients had received an assessment of their needs which resulted in appropriate action taken by the provider.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. However, the clinical records we reviewed demonstrated care was not always provided in line with current guidance. Some patients did not receive the required information regarding the medication as per Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency guidelines. Patients did not always receive timely medication reviews. Patients with undiagnosed conditions were not always identified and coded as such to ensure they received the necessary reviews and monitoring for their condition.

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.

NHS England data from June 2024 showed the practice had not met national targets for the uptake of cervical cancer screening. Screening for eligible patients aged 25 to 49 years old was 65.1% and for eligible patients aged 50 to 64 years old was 73.6% (the national target for both groups is 80%).

To address the uptake of cervical cancer screening, a designated member of staff was responsible for contacting patients using different methods of communication. Alerts were placed on patient records so opportunistic bookings could be made when patients attended for other matters. Patients were invited to discuss their concerns with a member of clinical staff. Patients could self-book their screening test; evening and weekend appointments were available for patients who preferred an appointment outside of the practice’s core opening hours. Unverified data shared by the practice showed improved uptake of cervical cancer screening in the last 12 months.

UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) data for the period of April 2024 to March 2025 showed the practice had not met the World Health Organisation (WHO) minimum recommendations for uptake for all the 5 indicators relating to childhood immunisations.

To address the uptake of childhood immunisations, the practice had made changes to the way appointments were arranged to identify the most effective way of offering appointments to patients. Patients with concerns about vaccinations were encouraged to speak to a member of to the clinical team to discuss their concerns.

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.