The Hive Health Centre

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

People 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 people’s 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. Staff involved those important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.

This service scored 83 (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’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. 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 service planned and delivered people’s 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 always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

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 to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services.

The practice worked with teams within the PCN and identified 3 project areas to concentrate on where improvements to patient’s health could be made. All 3 areas are ongoing and are yet to have the results of potential improvements made.

They chose to work with poorly controlled diabetics and how to effectively engage with them. The team consisted of a wellbeing coach, focused care worker and dietician. They looked at social problems and how to address the problems with the result of bringing the HbA1C down and a better controlled condition.

The practice worked with the Frailty Team to audit all patients and carry out a comprehensive assessment. They developed and used their own template to record the results. They looked at if they could stop some medications and looked at avoiding unavoidable hospital admissions. The next step is to develop a pathway to improve the experience of the patient.

The practice is running events to proactively look for patients to improve their cardiovascular risk as their next neighbourhood health project.

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

Staff focused 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. They worked with focused care workers, social prescribers and the Living Well team in assisting patients with their social and health care needs.

The patient participation group is active and working with other patients using focus groups.

A community walking group and a practice garden have been set up to help patients with mental health problems.

The practice has held events in local schools and with the police talking about safety, and a “snacktember” discussing healthy snacks and foods.

The service 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.

The practice met national targets for childhood immunisations except for the measles, mumps and rubella immunisation. They did not meet the national target for cervical screening, which was similar to the local achievement. To improve uptake the whole team followed up people by telephone and text and when patients contacted the practice opportunity was taken to offer an appointment convenient to the patient.

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 service 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.