Marine Avenue Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. 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.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including tackling obesity.

Staff were able to refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber who worked for the primary care network. In the last 12 months staff had referred 129 patients for further support which averaged approximately 11 per month.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves.

We saw staff completed clinical audits that focused on improving patient outcomes. For example, they had undertaken a 2-cycle audit of endometrial protection in female patients prescribed high-dose oestrogen hormone replacement therapy. The first audit demonstrated 83% compliance. Staff implemented actions resulting in the second audit result of 100% compliance.

The service exceeded 4 national targets for the uptake of childhood immunisations with 4 of the indicators at 100% against an expected level of 95%. There was 1 indicator slightly below the expected national level of 95% at 93% for the practice. This was for children aged 5 who have received immunisation for measles, mumps and rubella (2 doses of MMR).

The service met or exceeded the England average performance in relation to cancer screening programmes, including screening for breast, bowel and cervical cancer.

We saw there were 48 patients with a learning disability currently registered with the practice. Staff had completed 38 annual learning disability reviews which was 79% of all patients. All patients had been invited and 2 of these patients were under 18 years of age and therefore also registered with young person’s services for their review. A designated patient support coordinator had been responsible for coordinating appointments with patients or their carers for the last 3 years. This approach had led to improved outcomes, as the administrator had developed an understanding of individual needs and the necessary adjustments including home visits to encourage attendance.

Staff had recently organised a training session for women with a learning disability and their carers to support understanding of breast health and the importance of self-monitoring. Additional information had been provided to increase understanding of the cervical screening process and help alleviate any concerns or apprehension about attending screening appointments.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.