Fryern 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

We looked for evidence the service met people’s needs, and staff treated people equally and without discrimination. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 79 (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 Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The service made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed in a way that suited their needs, for example online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and a lift and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance to ensure ease of access to the service.

Leaders reviewed demand, appointment availability and care navigation to understand whether people were being directed to the most appropriate service. During a one-day review, staff recorded 347 incoming calls and monitored the use of alternative services and self-referral pathways. Findings were used to evaluate care navigation and identify whether people received timely support from the most appropriate service.

Leaders routinely reviewed appointment demand, availability and attendance, requests were reviewed, with urgent needs prioritised and the triage queue monitored throughout the day by the duty team. In June 2026, 70% of 7,115 appointments were face to face and 27% by telephone. The service provided timely access to appointments with 34% of appointments provided on the same day and a further 50% provided within 7 days. At the time of assessment, routine appointments with a GP were available within 10 days.

The service also monitored missed appointments and introduced improvements, including text reminders. This contributed to a reduction in did not attend (DNA) appointments from 1,687 between January and May 2025 to 1,584 during the same period in 2026, resulting in 103 additional appointments being used and more than 17 hours of additional clinical capacity. Further reductions were seen in missed postnatal appointments and appointments for children under 10 years old, demonstrating how the service used data to improve access and maximise opportunities for people to receive care.

National GP Patient Survey results showed that positive access experiences were sustained. In both 2025 and 2026, 85% of respondents described their overall experience of contacting the service as good, compared with the national average of 73%.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. They tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local services, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. For example, they introduced a daily multi-disciplinary team meeting including external agencies such as community nursing teams, to maintain consistent contact with teams looking after people who may be vulnerable. This enabled teams to manage care more effectively and provide people with timely access to services they may otherwise not seek such as home visits for vaccinations or wound dressings.

People who required additional assistance were supported by Care Co-ordinators who took the time to understand their individual circumstances, helping them access suitable services and ensuring they received care that met their needs, contributing to a more equitable experience.

Staff made reasonable adjustments to support inclusivity and improve people’s experiences and outcomes. For example, people with learning disabilities or autism were offered access to a sensory box, with clear information about it provided upon entry to the service. A hearing loop and translation services were available for people to use.

Staff understood the importance of an inclusive approach to care and adjusted the support they provided to ensure equity in people’s experience and outcomes, including offering longer appointments to those who needed more time. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used systems to capture and review feedback from people who used the service, which included those who did not speak English or have access to the internet. This was reflected in the feedback shared from people who used the service, which was positive.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.