Burnley Group Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The practice supported staff wellbeing.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

National GP Patient Survey data reflected that people did not always feel listened to and treated with kindness. Results from the survey were less positive than national and local results.

70% of respondents stated the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last general practice appointment, compared to 86% nationally and locally. 73% found the reception and administrative team at the practice helpful compared to 83% nationally and 86% locally.

The practice had not devised a plan for how to address the outcomes from the National GP patient Survey, nor had they showed they had implemented ways to understand why this was. They had however, reviewed the results of their Friends and Family Test (FFT) survey results which were positive, and had drawn out themes from the comments made by patients, which were shared with staff.

During our inspection, we overheard interactions with patients in person and by telephone, we observed staff engaging in polite and respectful communications and that arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy.

The practice appeared to treat people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. They took account of people’s individual differences, the needs of the local population and their backgrounds. Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were taken into account, as were their communication and accessibility needs to enable them to access the services they required.

Results from the National GP Patient Survey indicated that 78% of patients stated that during their last appointment, they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment, compared with 91% nationally and 92% locally. 76% of patients stated the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them during their last general practice appointment, compared to 87% nationally and 88% locally. 56% of patients felt the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at considering their mental wellbeing during their last general practice appointment, compared with 75% nationally and 74% locally.

The practice promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services.

The result of the National GP Patient Survey showed that 78% of respondents felt that during their last appointment, they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment, compared with 91% nationally and 92% locally.

The practice had implemented a new system of triage and prioritising need for their different types of appointments, including on-the-day and face-to-face appointments. This system was relatively new but the practice were able to show how this was an improvement from the previous system. They reported it had reduced the 8.00am rush to call the practice by telephone and better targeted persons with the greatest need and by the most appropriate approach.

Staff had algorithms and flow charts to support their decision-making and which enabled them to direct patients to the best services to meet their needs. They also had access to useful information around medical conditions and ailments which enabled them to refer patients to appropriate clinicians, to Accident and Emergency, or to a pharmacy. GPs made decisions about which patients should be seen urgently.

Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams and other sources of community support. The practice was effective at focusing resources to meet the immediate needs and demand of patients. We saw that on the day appointments were embargoed to ensure they remained available for those who needed them.

The results of the GP National Patient Survey showed lower than average levels of patient satisfaction with patients accessing appointments. 27% found it easy to get through to the practice by phone compared to 53% nationally and 57% locally. 38% found it easy to contact the practice using their website compared to 51% nationally and 48% locally. 45% found it easy to contact the practice using the NHS app compared to 53% nationally and 49% locally. 9% reported they usually go to see or speak to their preferred healthcare professional when they would like to, compared with 40% nationally and local averages.

64% of respondents stated they knew what the next step would be after contacting the practice, compared to 83% nationally and locally, and 94% stated they knew what the next step would be within two days of contacting the practice, compared to 93% nationally and locally.

Since the GP National Patient Survey had been completed, the practice had implemented a new triage and appointments system, which had improved appointment availability, telephone traffic into the practice and reduced call waiting times. This was evidenced by the practice and was anticipated that the next patient survey would show improved levels of satisfaction with access the practice in all areas.

The practice listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Members of the team had been provided with training in basic life support and the signs and symptoms of sepsis.

The practice cared about and promoted the well-being of their staff and supported staff to deliver person-centred care.

Most staff told us they were valued by leaders, although some reported they felt micro-managed. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the well-being needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work and with family-friendly practices. Managers told us about a process they implemented to standardise contracts, pay and conditions and created more parity within the practice. This included better pay and conditions for many staff and an alignment with terms and conditions in wider organisations. They reported this led to an improvement in staff retention and a reduction in sickness levels as a result. Managers and staff described initiatives to promote positive working environments and teamwork within the practice, to increase well-being and to promote better recruitment and retention. The practice had not undertaken a staff survey to understand the experience of staff.