You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 20 August 2013
Date of Publication: 6 September 2013
Inspection Report published 06 September 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 20 August 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff, were accompanied by a specialist advisor and used information from local Healthwatch to inform our inspection.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected and their views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

People we spoke with said they were treated with respect and dignity by all staff including the receptionists and the GPs. Information about the services provided by the surgery was available on the provider’s website and displayed in the reception area. Leaflets regarding the different services and health promotion issues were available for patients. People could book their appointments and request repeat prescriptions online.

We received mostly positive comments from people who used the service as regards the ease of booking an appointment. Most of the people we spoke with found the online appointment system suited them. A few patients we spoke with however said they had to wait a long time over the phone to book an appointment. Another patient we spoke with said, “if you want to see a specific GP, appointment waiting time can be long”, but also said that they had been seen fairly quickly in an emergency. Another person said, they never had any issue and “always had a positive experience”.

People who used the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. One person said they had accessed the practice’s website and found it useful. People who use the service and their representatives were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. The practice had developed a Patient Representative Group (PPG) and consulted with them about issues such as appointments and what surveys the practice ought to undertake. The practice developed surveys for people using the service and published the results online on their website. One person said they received emails and regular feedback on what actions had been undertaken.

People could express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People told us that the doctors took time to explain things to them. One person said that they were able to book double appointment if required, discuss issues with the clinician, and ask questions, and that their treatment issues were properly explained to them. People said they had received advice on healthy living. One person said they had been invited for a health check recently where various topics like smoking, exercise and diet were discussed. They said they had found it very useful, though they would also have preferred to have results of their tests, for example cholesterol levels, shared with them to help them manage their health life style better.

Reception staff were aware of maintaining confidentiality and privacy while handling patient information. Information was displayed in the reception area and consultation rooms regarding the availability of chaperone services. A chaperone policy was available and staff we spoke with had received training as regards their roles and responsibilities if they were required to chaperone. A complaints policy was available which however needed to be updated. The provider may also wish to note that the complaints procedure was not displayed in the reception or other accessible areas of the practice.