The Weobley and Staunton-On-Wye Surgeries

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 that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good.

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.

The practice made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in decisions about their care. Patients had access to appointments provided by a range of clinicians including GPs, nurses and healthcare assistants. The practice also utilised a pharmacist and paramedic from the primary care network to enhance patients care. Although patients had a named GP, the practice allowed the patient to choose the GP they would like to see for their appointment. The practice used patient feedback to identify areas for improvement and made necessary adjustments to ensure patient care was optimum.

The practice understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities and provided a range of services to meet their needs. Both pre-bookable and on the day appointments were available. The practice did not have an on-duty doctor system, which enabled patients to see their preferred GP. However, it was recommended that patients with long-term conditions like diabetes saw the same GP to enable continuity. Staff adopted good working relationships with the district nurses, palliative care nurses and safeguarding team to ensure the patients received appropriate care. Information was accessible about the range of services available that people could access or self-refer to such as carer support, sexual health, drug and alcohol misuse and mental health services.

The practice supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Some staff at the practice were able to speak different languages to accommodate the needs of patients. Staff also had access to interpretation services and British Sign Language. Patients were informed how to access their care records. The practice had a complaints policy that was accessible in their practice leaflet and on their website. Complaints were mostly managed in line with the practice’s policy; however not all staff followed the complaint letter template and therefore not all patients were aware how to seek support if they were not satisfied with the response.

The practice made it easy for people to share feedback about their care, treatment and support. For example, they had a suggestions box in reception and feedback through the NHS Friends and Family Test was also encouraged. The service monitored NHS Friends and Family Test feedback, and results were very positive about the service. The practice involved people and listened to their preferences when making decisions about their care. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback. The practice management team also held meetings with the Patient Participation Group (PPG). We were told that relationships between the PPG and the practice were good. They told us they could make suggestions, and improvements would be acted upon.

The practice made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Patients could access the services to suit their needs. For example, online, in person and by telephone. People could book an appointment on the same day or could book routine appointments in advance. Patients told us they could access appointments in a timely manner. Phone call waiting times were monitored and majority were answered within a timely manner. This was reflected in the feedback from the National GP Patient Survey data as people were positive in relation to their overall experience when contacting the service. For example, 87%of respondents found it easy to contact the practice by telephone, in comparison to the national average of 50%. Premises and equipment were accessible, and people were given support to overcome barriers to ensure equal access. For example, hearing loops were installed, both sites had wheelchair access and there were chairs with arms for those that needed them. Staff and leaders used people’s feedback to actively seek to improve access. When changes to services were made, equity of access was considered.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally, without discrimination. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or did not have access to the internet.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation wishes. Staff regularly attended multi-disciplinary meetings where they discussed patients who received end-of-life care. This information was shared with other services when necessary.