Clement Road Medical Practice

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

Data from the National GP Patient Survey showed that 83% of patients reported 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 slightly above the local average of 82% and below the national average of 86%.

Arrangements were in place to promote and protect patients’ privacy. Staff demonstrated an understanding of Gillick competency, and processes ensured that young people were supported to have appropriate control over their privacy and the level of parental involvement in their care.

The practice also demonstrated a compassionate and proactive approach to supporting patients affected by bereavement. For example, a bereavement leaflet was sent to families, which included information about support and services.

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. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care.

Systems were in place to make sure patients were treated in ways that suited them. Individual preferences were noted on the patient record. The practice made reasonable adjustments for patients with disabilities and offered interpreting and translation services. Staff we spoke with were aware of the needs of the practice’s population and gave us examples on how they supported or signposted patients to additional resources or support services.

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. The practice had access to a social prescriber through the PCN who provided support and information on local services within the community. The people we spoke with on the day of the onsite assessment told us they felt included in decisions about their care and treatment.

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.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff knew how to respond when a patient needed urgent attention and knew the processes to follow to ensure emergency support was given. We found all staff completed training in basic life support on an annual basis.

Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams. The practice had achieved Veteran Friendly Practice accreditation, a program designed to support practices in providing the best possible care for people with a military background and their families. They were also registered as a ‘safe surgery’ to remove barriers for vulnerable migrants, refugees, and homeless individuals.

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

Staff told us they felt valued and supported by the leadership team. They described leaders as approachable and responsive, with open communication channels that encouraged staff to share feedback and identify opportunities for improvement. This was reported to have a positive impact on staff wellbeing, engagement, and their overall experience of working at the practice.

Staff consistently described the practice as a positive, supportive, and welcoming place to work, where colleagues were approachable and worked well together. They gave examples of flexibility and reasonable adjustments made by leaders to support their wellbeing and maintain a work-life balance.