Leicester Terrace Health Care 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

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.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same. Staff actively involved individuals in assessing their needs and provided support where necessary to enhance their participation. Staff took appropriate steps to ensure people understood their care and treatment. Information was provided in a clear and accessible way, and staff checked understanding so that consent was informed and valid. where individuals lacked capacity,others such as family members or advocates in decision making processes ensuring actions were taken in the person’s best interests.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Reception staff utilised alerts within the patient records system to identify individual needs such as the need for longer appointments or interpreter support. During health reviews, staff assessed patients’ overall health, care, and well-being needs.

The practice had designated leads for specific health conditions who monitored patient registers and coordinated timely reviews. Clinical staff used structured templates during care reviews to address broader aspects of patients' health and well-being. The practice had access to a social prescriber who supported patients with referrals to other services. Patients who were carers were offered dedicated reviews to ensure their own health and well-being needs were addressed. We noted that assessments were thoroughly documented, covering both physical and mental health, along with lifestyle guidance. The practice also routinely conducted NHS Health Checks to identify patients at risk of developing diabetes and other health conditions at an early stage. 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.

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.

The practice had effective systems in place to ensure staff remained up to date with evidence-based guidance and relevant legislation. Clinical records reviewed confirmed that care was delivered in accordance with current best practice. Updates to clinical guidance were clearly documented and routinely discussed during the practice’s monthly teaching and learning meetings. Relevant information was also shared with appropriate staff to maintain consistency and compliance across the team. For instance, as part of the QOF (Quality Framework Performance) the diabetes specialist nurse worked collaboratively with the diabetic MDT (Multidisciplinary team) to run joint clinics within the practice, allowing patients to receive specialist-level care closer to home and reducing the need for hospital appointments. There was a strong emphasis on continuous professional development and upskilling staff to ensure care delivery aligned with the latest standards.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff had access to the information they needed to assess, plan, and deliver people’s care safely and effectively. Clear systems supported information-sharing, including regular team meetings, secure electronic records, and structured handover procedures. This ensured all staff involved in a person’s care had access to the most up-to-date and relevant information. The practice also had strong working relationships with other healthcare providers, community teams, and voluntary organisations. Referrals were made in a timely manner, and communication between services supported smooth transitions in care. Staff told us they valued the open communication within the team and with external partners, noting that it helped resolve issues quickly and prevented unnecessary delays for patients.

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 were proactive in identifying risks to patients’ health, including those who were in the last 12 months of life, individuals at risk of developing long-term conditions, and people with caring responsibilities. The practice supported national initiatives to improve population health, such as smoking cessation and weight management programmes. The practice had also redesigned its hypertension pathway to increase access, reduce unnecessary appointments, and enable patients to manage their blood pressure more independently. To support home monitoring, the practice maintained a supply of blood pressure monitors that could be loaned to patients who did not own one, allowing them to self-report their readings and engage actively in managing their condition.

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.

Clinical searches carried out showed that the practice had a system in place to ensure that patients that required urgent attention were flagged up and there was always someone available on the day to attend to this. During interviews, staff were aware of their roles in monitoring data which helped improve their outcomes. The practice met national targets for screening and immunisations. Our clinical record searches reviewed the number of patients with asthma who had been prescribed two or more courses of rescue steroids in the last 12 months. We reviewed a random sample of 5 patients, and all 5 patients had been followed up in a timely manner with up-to-date annual reviews.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Consent was recorded clearly in patient records, and staff ensured people were given enough information to make informed choices. This included explaining treatment options, possible risks, and likely outcomes in a way that was easy to understand. Records showed that staff had completed all relevant trainings within the Mental Capacity Act and adapted their communication to meet individual needs, for example by using interpreters, easy-read materials, or visual aids. Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were appropriate and were made in line with relevant legislation. DNACPR audits were completed annually by the provider, achieving full compliance and lessons from the audits were shared across the team. This is to ensure family involvement in decision-making is maintained as a core aspect of ethical care planning and supported through partnership with care homes. Records showed that staff had completed all relevant trainings within the Mental Capacity Act.