Binscombe Medical 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 patients in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed patient’s care and worked with other services to achieve this.

Leaders inspired a culture of improvement, where understanding current outcomes and exploring best practice was a deeply embedded part of the culture, and learning was widely shared and acted on.

At our last inspection, we rated this key question as good. At this inspection, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 79 (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 patients’ care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs with them.

Feedback from patients using the practice was positive. Patients felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs. Reception staff were aware of the needs of the local community. Reception 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 checked patient’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. Clinical staff used templates when conducting care reviews to support the review of patient’s wider health and wellbeing. The provider had effective systems to identify patients with previously undiagnosed conditions. Staff could refer patients with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

All staff had completed learning disability and autism training, and patients with complex health needs were given longer appointments to review their needs.

Feedback from patients using the practice was very positive. The results of the GP patient survey 2025 showed that 98% of practice respondents felt their needs were met during their last appointment (national average 90%).

The practice planned and delivered patient’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 best practice and standards.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. There was a strong emphasis on learning within the practice and regular meetings were held to support the sharing of information. Clinical supervision was in place.

The remote clinical searches we undertook included reviewing the monitoring of patients with long-term conditions to assess if National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommendations were followed. Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was provided in line with current guidance.

The practice worked well across teams and services to support patients. They made sure patients only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when patients moved between different services. We saw evidence of regular meetings taking place including, clinical, nurse, and partner meetings. There was also a ‘Reps’ meeting, where a representative from each staff group (including administration, and reception) attended. Staff could ask their representative to address issues, bring up ideas or to cascade information to the wider group. Information was then disseminated back to the teams.

The practice had strong relationships with the other practices that made up its Primary Care Network (PCN). Staff and leaders successfully maintained positive partnership arrangements with many local providers and charities.

Referrals to other services were audited to ensure that appointments were created for patients in a timely manner, for example, when patients were referred for suspected cancers.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver patient’s care, treatment, and support.

The practice supported patients to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice, and control. The practice supported patients to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Patients were encouraged and supported to make healthier lifestyle choices to promote their wellbeing and prevent deterioration. One of the GPs led a series of evening seminars across six weeks in summer 2025 raising awareness of mental health conditions. These had been attended by 60 to 80 people each time. An annual seminar at a local church was also held each year. This year’s topic was ‘new hope for chronic pain’. The practice supported children and young people with their mental health by arranging regular meetings with home school link workers from local primary and secondary schools where they discussed individuals of concern. The practice ran a weekly ‘Wellbeing Walk’ which all patients could attend.

The practice worked closely with a range of local organisations to support patients’ health and wellbeing.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to patients’ health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives, patients at risk of developing a long-term condition and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity.

The practice routinely monitored patients’ care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of patients themselves. Staff identified opportunities to refer patients through their care co-ordinators to improve their quality of life. GPs followed up patients who had received treatment in hospital and acted on information received in discharge summaries.

The practice engaged in audits and quality improvement. For example, we reviewed clinical audits completed for minor illness, chronic kidney disease and coil fitting.

From the clinical notes we reviewed, we found that patients who used the practice experienced positive outcomes as set out in legislation, standards, and evidence-based clinical guidance.

The practice told patients about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff we spoke with demonstrated the importance of ensuring that patients understood what they were consenting to and the importance of obtaining consent before they delivered care or treatment. Clinical and non-clinical staff had undergone training in the Mental Capacity Act and clinical staff understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making.

We noted that a minor operations audit completed in September 2025 showed patient consent had been recorded in 100% of cases.

Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded. Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were appropriate and were made in line with relevant legislation.