Kingston Health Centre

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 assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 85 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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

We reviewed feedback from patients from a range of sources including National surveys, NHS FFT and the practice internal feedback systems. Feedback was positive and confirmed that patients felt they were treated with kindness and dignity. Patient feedback we reviewed described staff as “extremely caring”, “always friendly and pleasant”.

Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. Patient consultations were held in private consulting rooms. The premises were spacious and consulting rooms were spread out which helped with privacy. There were confidentiality and dignity policies in place to further assist staff to know how to maintain confidentiality.

National GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt listened to. For example, 86% of people said that the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them during their last general practice appointment. This was in line with the local result of 89% and national result of87%. In addition, they also felt they were treated with kindness. For example, 83%said that the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last general practice appointment. This was compared to the result of87%and National result of86%.

Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support. Gillick competency had also been covered in one of the practices’ podcasts which all staff had access to and were required to listen to.

The practice ensured that additional support was provided to patients who were vulnerable. For example, patients identified as vulnerable were allocated a named GP with whom they had regular reviews and longer appointments scheduled if needed. In addition, the palliative care register was maintained to ensure those at end of life were reviewed regularly.

The practice had worked with local supermarkets and charities to respond to people’s needs with empathy respect. This included arranging donations for patients in local women’s shelters providing nappies and washing tablets and providing sanitary items for free in the practice.

The service treated people as individuals and was exceptional in how they made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The service took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. For example, they actively considered the religious needs of patients with diabetes and actively worked with them to plan care around fasting periods. This included ensuring it was safe for them to fast and adjusting medicines appropriately during these periods.

The practice had systems in place in recognition of equality characteristics. They completed quality improvement projects periodically to review records to ensure preferred names and pronouns were documented accurately. They ensured that care records were up to date with preferred names and pro-nouns highlighted. All staff had completed training in this area.

Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. Communications were produced for patients in other languages where the practice identified the need. For example, standard text messages relating to children’s immunisations were sent in Arabic and Turkish to patients to ensure they received the information. Information posters were displayed in and around the practice in Arabic, Farsi and Cantonese relating to antibiotic prescribing. As a result of these initiatives there was positive response and patients were more involved.

The practice had created a “Multifaith in Healthcare” policy highlighting religious and cultural needs of patients in a health care setting. It included their own literature as well as general information from other organisations. Staff could use this resource to ensure they had information to meet patients’ needs.

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

Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services. Staff told us they identified needs at registration. They had processes in place such as longer appointments and access to male and female GP’s if people wanted this.

The practice had equipment in place to support patients and maximise their independence. For example, they had a hearing loop in place for patients with impaired hearing. Another example was reviewing signage in conjunction with a dementia advisor. This was to ensure patients with additional needs found it easy to navigate the building.

The service 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. Patient feedback we reviewed stated “. the responsiveness of the staff is remarkable”.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff were trained to identify medical emergencies and signs of people in need of urgent medical attention in the waiting room. There were always two GP’s who were on-site with no patient facing list. This enabled the practice to have a GP on hand to provide immediate support in the event of a medical emergency.

For palliative care patients the practice demonstrated that they considered planning care around religious and spiritual supports needs. This included ensuring expediating death certificates when burials needed to take place in line with religious requirements and wishes.

Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams.

The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care. For example, the practice regularly reviewed staff workloads. As a result, they had reduced GP sessions from 16 to 14 and recruited additional GPs to ensure they were still able to offer the same number of appointments to patients.

All staff had protected time each day to engage with each other. This time was used to provide informal support, discuss queries or “simply have a break”. Staff told us they valued this time and felt it was evidence of leaders considering their wellbeing.

Staff told us leaders valued them. They referred to the leadership team as having an “open door policy”. Staff said that all leaders were approachable, and they felt “valued” and “listened to”.

The practice had an inhouse podcast that featured different members of the team in the practice. They spoke about issues and matters relating to physical, emotional and mental well-being. Staff told us they provided them with “balance”, “chill time” and “great emotional support”.

Managers told us that they provided opportunities for staff to provide feedback through planned meetings and impromptu requests to speak with them. Staff we spoke with confirmed that all leaders were accessible, and they felt confident to approach any manager.

Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. This included providing a “brunch” for all staff every week; making reasonable adjustments such as adjusting working patterns to support health needs and caring responsibilities; and adapted workstations to meet staff members specific needs. Occupational health support was also utilised to ensure staff well-being. All staff we spoke with confirmed that they were treated as individuals and their individual wellbeing was considered.

Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work. We saw team building via regular social events were established within the practice. Staff at all levels told us these events contributed “exceptionally” to their wellbeing.