Ouse Valley 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 treated 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.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. A review of clinical records demonstrated compliance with national guidance.

The service had systems in place to ensure staff kept up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. As part of our assessment, we conducted a detailed review of people’s care records. These demonstrated that care and treatment were generally being delivered in line with current national guidance and best practice, helping to ensure people received safe and effective care. However, we found one area where the service was not always following up people after treatment for an acute exacerbation of asthma within the timelines set out in guidelines. The service confirmed that it had reviewed its protocol for following up people in this case and had shared the revised protocol with the wider clinical team after our assessment.

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

Staff focused on identifying risks to people’s health, including those with caring responsibilities.

The service supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including tackling obesity. The service referred people to community wellbeing services covering diet, exercise, sleep and other lifestyle factors.

The service promoted targeted health checks and screening programmes, for example, encouraging people with serious mental health problems to attend for an annual review. We were told this had resulted in increased engagement with people about both their mental and physical health needs.

The service 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 leaders analysed performance data to benchmark the service against other services, targets and agreed objectives and took action to improve where indicated.

The service met the national target of 90% for the uptake of childhood immunisations for 4 out of 5 indicators; and achieved 88% for the remaining indicator. The service had also achieved uptake of 83% for cervical screening of people aged 50 to 64, and 78% for people aged 25 to 49. This was in line with the national target of 80%. The team followed-up people who did not attend for immunisations or screening to explain the benefits and address any questions.

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.