The Vale Surgery

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 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 service generally treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. Reception teams were trained to recognise when someone might require additional privacy and would proactively offer options such as speaking in a private room. According to the National GP Patient Survey 81% of patients said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them during their last appointment, which is below the local and national averages of approximately 86% and 87%.

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.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They 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. Staff reported that the practice team was multicultural and experienced, which helped them remain aware of important cultural practices and sensitivities. They used this awareness to guide conversations and ensured care was adapted appropriately. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. The service had established processes to support patients, such as providing interpreters and scheduling double appointments, when necessary, to allow sufficient time to explore their medical needs.

The service promoted people’s independence and supported them to be involved in decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff told us they routinely asked patients what type of support they needed and allowed patients to lead the conversation, ensuring the approach was personalised and not based on assumptions such as age. They explained that the practice provided information leaflets in different languages, including materials for programmes such as cervical screening, and could produce large‑print versions when required. Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services.

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. Staff knew how to respond when a patient needed urgent attention and knew the processes to follow to ensure emergency support was given. The practice shared an example of an emergency scenario that demonstrated how effective their processes were. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams.

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

Staff told us they were valued by leaders. 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. There was a positive culture of recognising staff through celebrating birthdays and achievements, with shared meals and team gatherings. Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work. We saw team building days were established within the practice.