Drs Mirza, Sukhani and Partners

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last inspection, we rated this key question Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same. This was because we found staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff also treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. The practice treated people as individuals and promoted people’s independence, choice and control. Staff responded to people’s immediate needs, with systems and processes in place to ensure workforce well-being and enablement.

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 treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

We mostly received positive feedback from people who use the service with regards to interactions with both non-clinical and clinical staff. Comments referred to how people were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity in their day-to-day care and support. People also felt staff listened to them and communicated appropriately with them and in a way, they could understand. However, one person expressed dissatisfaction with regards to 1 non-clinical staff member.

Data from the 2024 GP patient survey showed the practice was generally in line with local and national averages for experience at last appointment. This included, how the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern (78%); and how they had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to (89%); with 65% of people responding positively to the overall experience of their GP practice.

Staff shared examples of how they knew and understood the people who used their services, including their preferences, wishes, personal histories and backgrounds. For example, accommodating care and support as per person’s needs. They also said they would respond to people’s needs quickly and efficiently, especially if they were in pain, discomfort, or distress. For example, through a total triage model of care for patients and triaging process.

Additionally, staff also told us people’s privacy and dignity were respected and always upheld. For example, private areas were available at both sites for patients, if required.

The practice had policies and procedures in place to make sure information about people was treated confidentially, as well as to respect their privacy.

Positive feedback from the care home under the care of the practice and the practice’s Primary Care Network (PCN), showed a culture of kindness and respect between colleagues from other organisations.

During the site visits at both locations, we observed staff interacting with patients with kindness, empathy and compassion, while respecting their privacy and dignity.

The practice treated people as individuals, and they made sure their care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Feedback from people that used the service was generally positive about how they were treated as individuals. People remarked on how their individual needs and preferences were understood and these were reflected in their care, treatment and support.

Staff told us people’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs were understood and met. They also shared examples of how they treated people as individuals, considering any relevant protected equality characteristics. These included, Deaf people, people with a learning disability and older patients.

The practice had systems and processes in place to make sure people’s communication needs were met, to enable them to engage in their care and treatment, and for them to be supported to maximise their experience and outcomes. For example, the practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language interpreters, and these were booked for patients when needed.

The practice promoted people’s independence, so they knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Some people gave positive feedback on how they felt supported to have choice and control over their own care; and to make decisions about their care, treatment and well-being.

Staff shared examples of how they supported people to have choice and control over their own care and to make decisions about their care, treatment and well-being. For example, through referrals to specialist services and organisations to support and maximise people’s independence and outcomes from care and treatment. They also supported people to understand their rights by using different ways to communicate. This included access to interpreter services, such as British Sign Language interpreters.

The practice had systems and processes in place to make sure peoples records were kept up to date with information that supported them to maintain relationships and networks that were important to them

The practice listened to and understood people's needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Some comments in the feedback from people that used the service expressed satisfaction in how people’s needs, views, wishes and comfort were prioritised, and staff quickly anticipated these to avoid any preventable discomfort, concern or distress.

Staff told us they were alert to people’s needs and took time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs. For example, through a total triage model of care for patients and triaging process.

Staff also said they would recognise when people needed urgent help or support and would use appropriate tools and technology to assist, including talking promptly with a GP if they had any concerns about a patient. This approach was reiterated by staff in their questionnaires.

The practice cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled them to deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us leaders recognised and met the well-being needs of staff which in turn benefitted people by supporting and enabling them to deliver person centred care. This included resources and facilities for safe working, such as access to a wellbeing coach via the practice’s Primary Care Network (PCN).

Staff also said they felt valued by their leaders and their colleagues. They had a sense of belonging and the ability to contribute to decision making. This positive feedback about workforce wellbeing and enablement was reaffirmed by staff in their questionnaires.

The practice had systems and processes in place for people and staff to provide feedback, raise concerns and suggest ways to improve the service or patient and staff experiences. If necessary, leaders provided a timely and considered response. This included positive feedback from patients which the practice termed as ‘plaudits’.