Railway Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Requires Improvement. At this assessment, the rating has changed.

This service scored 68 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. Recent survey results, including from the National GP Patient Survey and the NHS Friends and Family Test, showed people were satisfied with services. There was an active patient participation group (PPG) who represented the views of people using the service. Representatives from the PPG described how managers made positive changes because of feedback, such as implementing a new phlebotomy service at the practice and increasing evening and weekend appointment availability.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information to promote the take up of screening and immunisation programmes was available in a range of languages. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. People were able to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The service involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. The service routinely asked people to complete Friends and Family Test feedback forms and reviewed the feedback for any trends or themes. We saw complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example they had extended appointments for people with a learning disability. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. GPs were responsible for triaging telephone calls from people asking for an appointment. They were offered an appointment appropriate for their assessed need or directed to an alternative service. People who required routine appointments outside of the usual working hours had access to an enhanced access service operated by the local primary care network. Results from the 2025 National GP Survey show that patient experience had improved for example, the percentage of people who responded positively to how easy it was to get through to someone at their GP practice on the phone had increased from 37.9% to 55.4% and the number of people who responded positively to their overall experience of making an appointment had increased from 43.8% to 69.6%. The practice monitored access and routinely audited capacity and demand and increased staff answering the telephone as required. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor and a automatic door had been fitted to the entrance.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Feedback provided by people using the service, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or have access to the internet.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.