Dr Christopher Bark Also known as The Soho Square Surgery

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

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains as good. We assessed all quality statements for this key question and found that the practice was providing effective services. We looked for evidence that staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this.

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.

The practice made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. 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. Feedback from people using the practice was positive. People felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. 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 could refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

The practice 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. Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was usually provided in line with current guidance. Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The practice worked well across teams and services to support people.

The practice worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services. The processes in place enabled staff to liaise with community teams such as community nurses, health visitors, and palliative care nurses.

The practice supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Patients had access to a social prescriber, which helped them improve their health, well-being, and social welfare by connecting them to community services.The practice supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity. Healthy living information was available on the in the waiting room. The leaders informed us they were working on the website to include further helpful information for patients. Patients had access to a social prescriber, which helped them improve their health, well-being, and social welfare by connecting them to community services.

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 performed below the national targets in relation to all childhood immunisations and cervical screening ranges. The practice was aware of this and informed us they were actively call-and-recalling patients, they offered a range of appointments including out-of-hours, and the nurse and staff offered opportunistic immunisations and smears. The primary care network (PCN) acknowledged the practice’s efforts and requested for the strategies to be shared among other practices in the network. However, there was no indication that the strategies were improving performance as the published data remains below target. For example recent data showed that all the childhood immunisations ranges were below 63% (World Health Organisation recommends a rate of 95%) and cervical screening ranges were below 61% (World Health Organisation recommends a rate of 80%).

Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded. The practice told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.Clinicians supported patients in making decisions. Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were appropriate and were made in line with relevant legislation. Staff had completed mental capacity act training.

Staff who carried out chaperone duties were trained for the role and had received a disclosure and barring (DBS) check. Posters were displayed in the practice informing people this was available to them.