The Weardale 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

We looked for evidence that staff monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (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.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The provider supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity. Information related to these initiatives were available on the practice’s website and within the practice building. A representative from the PPG told us that practice leadership provided updates to the PPG related to vaccination rollouts and any current health topics. The 2026 National GP Patient Survey showed that 94% of respondents felt that they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last general practice appointment. This was higher than the national average of 92%.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves.

The provider met national targets for the uptake of childhood immunisations and cervical screening. Clinical audit and quality improvement activity was well established within the provider's governance arrangements and was used to improve the quality and safety of care. Staff had completed a wide range of audits, including audits of 2 week wait referral data and bladder cancer diagnoses. Audit outcomes were used to identify opportunities for improvement. For example, changes were made to the process of processing urine dip results. This learning was shared across the Primary Care Network (PCN). Medical students and GP Registrars were also encouraged and supported to complete clinical audits.

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.