St Georges Medical Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good. People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

This service scored 82 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. Our review of clinical records showed the majority of people were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care. People expressed strong confidence in the clinical staff, including GPs, nurses and practice pharmacists. They felt listened to and not rushed during appointments. In addition, people commented that GPs and nurses provided follow up to treatment, tests results and referrals.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The service had access to interpreter / translation services and a hearing loop. Information in an easy read format was available for those who needed it.

A range of information on aspect of health for all ages and local support groups was on display. Multiple health information leaflets available. There were leaflets for a respiratory virus (RSV) written in Chinese and a leaflet regarding smoking cessation in easy read format for people with a learning disability.

As the result of quality improvement work the nursing team invited people new to the country for a health check and discussion around the service, screening programmes and childhood immunisations, and whenever possible updated records with relevant information from the persons’ medical notes.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. Complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy. Information on how to escalate concerns was shared with people in the service response and in the complaints leaflet. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints. For example, the introduction of the new telephone system, and systems to ensure text reminders who not to people who no longer required their appointment.

The service routinely asked people to complete Friends and Family Test feedback forms and reviewed the feedback for any trends or themes. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Although there were no themes or trends, feedback and learning points were shared with the staff team as part of the annual complaints review process.

Feedback from the 2 care homes we spoke with was very positive about how people were listened to especially for the GPs that provided the ward rounds in each home.

The service was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Extended appointments were available for those who needed them, and the service accommodated people had specific needs around where they waited for appointments and when they were seen. People were able to book appointments in person, over the telephone and on line, and were offered a range of different appointment types. The appointment system had been amended to proactively manage the on the day appointments to reduce the telephone call demand at 8am and 2pm. People were offered a range of different appointment types.

The Patient Forum was supporting the service with assessing accessibility for disabled people and had previously undertaken a walk around of the building to assess the suitability for people living with dementia. Services for people were located on the first floor the building, which was accessible via a lift or stairs.

National GP Patient Survey data and the majority of feedback received from people was positive about their experience of contacting the service. People reported they could get urgent appointments quickly, but it was more challenging to book routine or follow up appointments. Indicators showed 92% of respondents were positive about their overall experience of contacting the practice, above the national average of 67%. In addition, 74% of respondents were positive about how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone, again above the national average of 50%.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the service, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not have access to the internet.

The service supported people from the transgender community to access appropriate medicines through shared care agreements. Systems had been introduced to invite trans men for routine cytology screening as appropriate. Clinicians had received training on transgender health. People could request to change their name and status on their NHS records, and GPs provided information regarding the consequences and benefits so people were able to make an informed choice.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary. For example, the out of hours services and other health care professionals involved in the care of this group of people. Staff shared an example of the support the service provided for a particular person who was resistant to health care intervention. The service ensured the person interacted with a small number of trusted clinicians to discuss their end of life wishes and provide appropriate care in the community.

The care of people following the end of life (EoL) pathway was overseen by a lead clinician, and care and support discussed during monthly multidisciplinary meetings. Feedback from the care homes was positive about the support provided for all involved at the end of resident’s lift , and bereavement support was offered as part of the EoL pathway.