Lakeside Medical Practice

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, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

Patients were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in patients care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.

This service scored 71 (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 patients’ care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Staff at the practice were aware of the needs of the local community. Coffee mornings were held once per month where patients were invited to give feedback to practice staff. Patients felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. 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 patients’ health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. The provider had effective systems to identify patients with previously undiagnosed conditions. Staff could refer patients with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber. There were also walk-in sessions available for people wishing to seek advice from a social prescriber.

The service planned and delivered patients care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. 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.

The service worked well across teams and services to support patients. They made sure patients only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when patients moved between different services.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver patients’ care, treatment, and support. The practice worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services.

The service supported patients at 2 local care homes. We contacted both homes for feedback and received a response from 1 care home. Leaders in the care home told us patients registered with the practice and their relatives were happy with the care received. Medicines were reviewed regularly and referrals were made in a timely manner. The care home had regular visits from GPs and was involved in discussions via monthly multi-disciplinary team meetings.

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

Staff focused on identifying risks to patients’ health, including patients at risk of developing a long-term condition. Prevalence of diabetes and obesity was higher within the practice population than local and national averages. The service had taken part in a healthy living project aimed at engaging with patients from a Black African background. The project included a session on exercise and nutrition and people could be referred to local low cost gyms and exercise classes.

NHS England data from June 2024 showed the practice had not met national targets for the uptake of cervical cancer screening. Screening for eligible patients aged 25 to 49 years was 64.8% and for eligible patients aged 50 to 64 years was 74.5% (the national target for both groups is 80%).

UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) data for the period of 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 showed the practice had not met the World Health Organisation (WHO) minimum recommendations for uptake of all 5 of the indicators relating to childhood immunisations.

To address the uptake of cervical cancer screening and childhood immunisations, the provider contacted patients who were hesitant to take up screening or immunisations to discuss their concerns; placed alerts on patients records so that opportunistic appointments could be made when patients had appointments for other matters; and sent out reminders using different methods of communication.

The service told patients 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.