Waddesdon 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 inspection, we rated this key question as Good. At this inspection, 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 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 practice made sure people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The practice performed better than the national averages in the results of the 2025 National GP Patient Survey regarding access. This showed people could access the service when they needed it in a way that suited their needs, such as by telephone, in person or through the service’s website. For example:

• 66% of respondents to the survey said they found it easy to get through to this service by telephone, compared to a national average of 53%.
• 73% of respondents to the survey said they found it easy to contact this service using their website, compared to a national average of 51%.
• 82% of respondents to the survey described their overall experience of contacting this service as being good, compared to a national average of 70%.

To further improve patient satisfaction regarding access, the practice reviewed data and known 'hot spots' for increased demand and increased GP availability on Monday mornings and increased dispensary cover for Friday afternoons.

All services were available on the ground floor: there was a door ramp available to ensure ease of access to the service.

The dispensary opening hours aligned to the core practice opening hours.

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. For example:

• Patients whose circumstances may make them vulnerable, such as those with a learning disability, were offered appointments at quieter times.
• The practice provided dispensary services for people who needed additional support with their medicines, for example weekly or monthly blister packs.
• The practice accommodated home visits and 2 alternative locations for collection of dispensed prescriptions for those who had difficulties getting to the practice due to limited local public transport availability.

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.

Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff followed processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances.

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.