Lakeside 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 inspection, we rated this key question as outstanding. At this assessment, the rating has changed to good. At this inspection we found that some of those areas previously regarded as outstanding practice were now embedded throughout the majority of GP practices. While the provider had maintained this good practice, the threshold to achieve an outstanding rating had not been reached. The practice is therefore now rated good for providing responsive services.

Patients were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information patients could understand. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. Patients received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities. Patients were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

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 made sure patients 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 patients’ needs. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in decisions about their care.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of patients and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community. The provider had arranged a healthy day aimed at looking at obesity in the community and encouraging positive change through realistic objectives. This included providing information on free local events, low cost gym memberships and dietary advice for culturally diverse diets. The provider asked attendees for feedback on the event which was positively received by those who attended. Patients expressed an interest in the advertised local events and valued the dietary information. The provider also noted areas for improvements, including better engagement with patients aged under 25 years.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for patients to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. However, responses to complaints did not always include details of the Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman (PHSO) and information that the PHSO could be contacted if the patient remained dissatisfied with the outcome of their complaint.

Learning from complaints was not used consistently to make improvements to the service. Staff told us they were involved in investigating complaints they were involved in, however some staff told us they were not told about learning from complaints they had no direct involvement with.

The service made sure that patients could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. There was an effective system for triaging appointment requests that meant patients could access the right appointments to meet their needs. Requests for appointments were made via an online form, however patients could also call the practice or visit in person to request an appointment, where a member of practice staff would complete the form for them.

National GP Patient Survey data collected between January and March 2025 showed that patients were satisfied with access to the service. Respondents were asked about the ease of contacting the practice via telephone (44.2% responded positively, compared with the national average of 52.9%) and their overall experience of contacting the practice (79.9% responded positively compared with the national average of 69.6%).

Feedback from patients shared directly with CQC was positive about access. Many patients told us they found it easy to access appointments and received quick responses to requests for medication. Some patients expressed difficulty using the online forms but also told us they were supported by staff to access care and treatment.

Patients could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor and the practice was accessible to people using wheelchairs or mobility scooters. Staff at a local care home supported by the practice told us it was easy to contact the practice and speak to a member of staff when needed.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff understood local health inequalities and worked with local organisations to address these.

The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Proof of identification or address was not required to register at the practice. Homeless people could use facilities at the practice to have a hot drink and charge mobile telephones.

Patients 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 patients were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary.