You are here

Archived: HT Practice Good

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 December 2013
Date of Publication: 22 January 2014
Inspection Report published 22 January 2014 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 12 December 2013, talked with people who use the service and talked with staff. We reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

Patient’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with six patients including a child and a parent who attended the practice. They told us the doctors listened to their concerns and explained their treatment or care options to them.

Patients of HT practice had the choice of seeing a GP, a practice nurse or a healthcare assistant at either Trafalgar Square surgery or Highlands surgery. Patients told us they liked this because it meant they could access treatment when and where it best suited them. One patient told us: “I think it’s fantastic. It’s excellent I like that I can go to either surgery.”

Two other patients told us it was ‘easy’ to get and appointment. One patient said: “I like that I can go to either practice if they don’t have an appointment at Trafalgar Square then I can go to Highlands.” This meant that the practice was providing patient’s with good access to appointments and offering patients’ choice.

One patient we spoke with wasn’t happy because they had waited 20 minutes for a blood test; they told us that they had not been advised that the clinic was running late. We spoke with the head of reception and the practice manager for the surgery about this. They told us that it was the usual practice for reception staff to advise patients if surgery was running late. On the day of our inspection we saw reception staff advising patients in the afternoon that the surgery was running late due to emergency patient appointments. Other patients we spoke with confirmed that when they had previously attended and surgeries were running late reception staff always advised them.

The opening times of the practice were displayed and information was available that advised patients about how to make an appointment and how to access emergency treatment. We saw that patients could book appointments through an on line booking service or via telephone or calling into the practice. We were told that text messages were sent to patients to remind them of their appointment. We saw that a patient check in service was provided in the waiting area.

HT Practice provided a service to a large Asian community and a growing Polish community in the Tameside area. We saw that when patients first registered with the practice patients could record their ethnicity. This information assisted reception staff in accessing interpreter services for patients. The use and consideration of interpreter services showed that the registered provider had taken measures to promote equality and encourage people's dignity and independence when accessing the service.

We saw the practice offered a patient chaperone service. A chaperone is a member of staff who can sit in with the person during their consultation. For example it could be offered during consultation by the doctor if any physical examination was required. Details of the chaperone service were displayed in doctor's consultation rooms and other treatment areas. The practice manager had completed a chaperone training course and told us there were plans for other members of staff to complete this training. This meant the provider had taken appropriate action to ensure people's privacy and dignity were respected. We saw that patient consultations took place in privacy and doors to consultation rooms were closed when a patient was seen.

We saw a range of health promotional literature displayed in patient waiting areas, in GP treatment rooms and other treatment areas. The promotional material included information on vaccinations, protection against abuse and information about healthy eating and stopping smoking. A practice leaflet was also available which gave people information about the services the practice offered. This meant people who used the service were provided with appropriate information about the care, treatment and support choices available.