Dr V Paramanathan's 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 monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

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.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to 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 focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity.

The service provided care to residents of 2 local care homes.Residents received weekly GP and practice nurse visits, supporting timely review and treatment. The care home reported that clinical staff, including GPs, the pharmacist and practice nurse, provided excellent support and continuity of care. They described the service as reliable, supportive and committed to residents' safety and wellbeing.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves. Although the service encouraged people to participate in population screening, they were not meeting national screening targets for cervical screening.

Cervical screening uptake was 72% for eligible women aged 50 to 64 and 64% for eligible women aged 25 to 49, below the national target of 80%.The service had a cervical screening policy which set out a range of measures to promote uptake. These included opportunistic screening by clinicians, practice advertising, encouragement from reception staff, and a structured recall process involving multiple contact attempts and links to enable patients to self-book appointments. At the time of our assessment, 2 female GPs and the practice nurses were undertaking training to implement and offer women self-swabbing options. Although measures were in place to improve uptake, their impact was not yet reflected in nationally reported data.

The service met the World Health Organisation (WHO) rate of 95% for 3 out of 5 routine childhood vaccinations in 2024/25. Uptake of the Pneumococcal booster at age 2 was 91% and uptake of 2 doses of MMR at age 5 was 82%.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.