The Bacon Lane Surgery

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 involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this.

At our last inspection in July 2023, we rated this key question as Requires improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed, and we rated this key question as Good.

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 practice made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Feedback from people using the service was positive. People felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs.

Audits of long-term conditions were done to check for abnormal blood sugar levels and chronic kidney disease risk. Care plans and Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) records were completed and reviewed regularly.

Reception staff were aware of the needs of the local community. Reception staff used digital flags within the care records system to highlight any specific individual needs, such as the requirement for longer appointments or for a translator to be present.

Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. Clinical staff used templates when conducting care reviews to support the review of people’s wider health and wellbeing. The provider had effective systems to identify people with previously undiagnosed conditions.

Staff could refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

The practice planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them and considered their preferences and wishes. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was provided in line with current guidance.

Regular updates provided by the primary care network were reviewed monthly via a dashboard. Data quality on the clinical system used by the practice was reviewed daily.

The practice worked well across teams and services to support people. Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The practice worked with other services or health care partners to ensure continuity of care and where appropriate, the clinical tasks were delegated to other services. All relevant teams and staff were given access to information and guidance as they were made available.

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

During the assessment, we spoke with a social prescriber who outlined the support they had provided to help individuals connect with local services aimed at improving health and wellbeing. This included training people on how to use the NHS App and facilitating connections with council tax advisors to address financial challenges.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to patients’ health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives, patients at risk of developing a long-term condition and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity.

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

From the clinical notes we reviewed, we found that people who used the service experienced positive outcomes as set out in legislation, standards, and evidence-based clinical guidance.

The practice routinely invited patients for child immunisations and during this assessment we found that the practice had demonstrated improvements in childhood immunisation uptake compared to the previous inspection in May 2023.

The practice employed a Polish speaking nurse and a Romanian speaking care coordinator to engage with patients in their native languages, aiming to encourage those who had previously declined to vaccinate their children despite multiple awareness efforts about the programme's importance and benefits.

The practice informed us that they were proactively involved with cervical screening and assigned dedicated staff members to call and invite eligible patients, which resulted in better uptake of the test. The practice had cervical screening uptake (63% in June 2023) below the expected national target (80%). However, the practice shared the recent unverified local data, which showed an improved uptake of 73%. The practice informed us that they were one of the best performing practices in the locality.

The practice told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded. Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were appropriate and were made in line with relevant legislation. Our review of notes where a DNACPR decision had been recorded, identified that where possible, the patients’ views had been sought and respected. We saw that information had been shared with relevant agencies.