Thorneloe Lodge 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 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 good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 71 (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 patients were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. Patients had access to appointments provided by a range of clinicians including GPs, physician associate, nurses and healthcare assistants. The practice used patient feedback to identify areas for improvement and made necessary adjustments to ensure patient care was optimum. Feedback from people who use the service was generally positive with regards to interactions with both non-clinical and clinical staff, with varied examples given on the provision of person-centred care. Staff shared examples of how people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices when deciding how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs. For example, most patients were supported to understand their condition, care and treatment options and any advice would be provided.

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. The practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. Staff told us patients could pre-book appointments and they also reserved on the day appointments if urgent care was needed. Information was accessible about the range of services available that patients could access or self-refer to such as carer support, sexual health, 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. Different languages were available on the practice website to accommodate patient’s needs. 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 on their website. Complaints were managed in line with their policy. Patient feedback was positive as they felt their complaint would be dealt with appropriately. The lessons learnt from complaints was shared in staff meetings to ensure all staff were aware of the positive changes made following the complaint.

The practice made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas about their care and treatment. For example, they had a feedback box in reception and encouraged patients to leave feedback through the NHS Friends and Family Test. The practice 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. Learning from complaints was also evident as staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback. The practice also had meetings with the Patient Participation Group (PPG). The PPG members told us they had a good relationship with the practice and felt listened too. For example, waiting times on the telephone were long so the practice had implemented a new telephone system. This has reduced the waiting times and offers a call back service.

The practice enabled patients to access the service in ways that suited them to ensure they got the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The practice opening hours were 8:00am to 6:30pm Monday to Friday. Same day urgent appointments were available, and routine appointments could be booked in advance. Patients could access the services in various ways that suited their needs. For example, online, in person and by telephone. Patients told us they could mostly access appointments in a timely manner.

Patient feedback from the National GP Patient Survey highlighted the following: 48% found it easy to get through to this GP practice by phone, in comparison to the national average of 50%; 44% found it easy to contact this GP practice using their website, in comparison to the national average of 48%; 50% found it easy to contact this GP practice using the NHS App, in comparison to the national average of 45%; 28% usually get to see or speak to their preferred healthcare professional when they would like to, in comparison to the national average of 40%. However, when patients were asked about their overall experience when contacting the GP practice, 71% of respondents described their experience as good, which is higher in comparison to the national average of 67%.

Staff and leaders used people’s feedback to actively seek to improve access. In response to the National GP Patient Survey data, the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service and introduced a new telephone system, that embedded a call back option. Phone call waiting times were monitored and discussed during team meetings. If staff were experiencing a busy period, staff from the administration team were able to help and therefore reduce waiting times for patients.

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 was positive with regards to feeling like discrimination is mitigated. 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. For example, the practice 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. For patients with autism and additional sensory needs, the practice offered a sensory friendly environment.

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.