Tower House 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 staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with advice, support, and had a system to review people’s care. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

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.

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 provider told us how people living with long-term health conditions were monitored and referred or signposted to local support services for information, education, and advice linked to their needs. People could be referred to services provided by the primary care network (PCN). These included a social prescribing service for support with social issues impacting on their health such as isolation and housing.

The provider offered patient health checks, raised awareness of health conditions and the importance of health screening.

The provider told us how they routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it and ensure it was meeting people’s needs.

The provider carried out regular audits through which information about people’s care and treatment was used to make improvements if required. For example, they told us how they audited prescribing to ensure this was safe and that people were having any required health checks. They had a system to liaise with and to review the needs of patients with external health and social care professionals. The service also worked with the PCN to make improvements to patient care where needed.

The service met the minimum the 90% minimum target for the uptake of 2 childhood immunisations and met the WHO target of 95% for 3 childhood immunisations. The service’s performance was above the England average in relation to cancer screening programmes for breast and bowel cancer. The service was below the national target for cervical screening for women in the 25 – 49 (69%) and 50 – 64 (72%) years age groups. The service was taking action to improve the uptake of cervical screening. For example, they were contacting people who did not attend for appointments, extended access appointments were offered, staffing levels had been reviewed, and they were working on an alternative system to book people in for screening appointments.

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.