St John's Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We assessed all quality statements from this key question. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has remained the same. The service had an active Patient Participation Group (PPG), which the practice approached for feedback on the services they provided. We found that arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. The staff we spoke to told us they felt supported by leaders and felt that their views were listened to and acted upon. However, patient feedback from the National GP Patient Survey (2024) indicated that the practice was performing below national averages regarding kindness, compassion and dignity and being treated as an individual.

This service scored 65 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. As part of the assessment, we reviewed the results of the National GP Patient Survey (2024). We saw that from 201 responses, 81% of patients said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last appointment, which was close to the national average (85%). We found that patients who attended appointments were offered a chaperone when needed. Rooms were also available for patients who wished to have conversations in private. Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

The practice had systems and processes to ensure people’s communication needs were met, to enable them to engage in their care and treatment, and for them to be supported to maximise their experience and outcomes. The practice website could be viewed in several languages and patients had access to translation services when required. All staff had completed specific training to improve their own knowledge and understanding of how to support different patients. This included training on equality and diversity and safeguarding. Staff we spoke to understood patients’ personal, cultural, social and religious needs. The practice offered extended appointments for patients with additional needs.

There were systems and processes in place to promote people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. However, these systems were not always effective. We saw from the National GP Patient Survey that 64% of patients said that the healthcare professional they saw was good at considering their mental wellbeing (National Average 73%). Patients were able to book appointments with a variety of clinical staff, including GPs, a nurse practitioner and a physiotherapist. The practice had a social prescriber who provided patients with support to improve their health and wellbeing. The practice actively encouraged patients to become involved with how the practice delivered services, including by promoting the PPG on their website. Patients were also invited to social wellbeing events.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams. However, the service did not always listen to and understand people’s needs, views and wishes. The National GP Patient Survey (2024) indicated that 79% of patients said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them. This was below the national average (87%).

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.
Staff told us they were supported to develop their careers with further training and monthly learning sessions. Leaders communicated well with staff and ensured that they were kept up to date with changes to guidance and legislation. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work and reported that they found managers to be approachable.