Gladstone House Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remained 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.

The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. Arrangements were in place to promote people’s privacy.

National GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt they were treated with kindness. For example, 91% of people who responded stated the healthcare professional treating them with care and concern during their last appointment. In addition, 81% of respondents responded positively to the overall experience of their GP practice.

Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

People’s personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. People’s communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. People were asked at registration about their first language and a person’s preferred method of communication was recorded on their electronic record. Staff told us they accommodated people’s individual needs through larger print letters, longer appointments or quiet spaces whilst waiting for an appointment. Home visits were offered to people who were housebound or found it too distressing to visit the practice.

The National GP patient survey results found 98% of people who responded to the survey had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to during their last appointment, above the national average of 93%.

The practice had identified 107 people registered with the service as carers which was approximately 2% of the practice population. Alerts were added to the records of carers to make staff aware of their additional needs. Carers could be referred to the care co-ordinator or social prescriber if they needed additional support. Carers were offered flu vaccines and if the person they cared for was housebound, home flu vaccinations were offered.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. Staff helped people and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services and could refer people to the care co-ordinator and social prescriber for information and guidance on support available to them.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. There was a system that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support.

The GP Patient Survey patient resulted found 93% of people who responded to the survey stated they felt listened to by the healthcare professional during their last appointment.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. Staff reported being supported if they were struggling at work. The provider organised social events and provided a buffet lunch at practice learning events as a thank you to staff for their hard work.

There was a wellbeing champion, who disseminated relevant information, including a wellbeing newsletter to the staff team. Staff spoke positively about this member of staff and the support they provided. There was a monthly staff nomination scheme, whereby each member of staff anonymously nominates a colleague and gives a reason for that nomination. The person with the highest number of votes received a voucher and feedback from their colleagues was shared with them. Staff told us they valued the recognition by their colleagues and the treat for themselves.

Staff told us they were valued by leaders and working at the service felt like being part of a family. Feedback from staff was positive about the support they received from leaders and staff told us they were listened to and were supported when they required additional support. They told us the practice manager and GP partners took the time to talk with them and enquire about their and their family’s wellbeing.