Henmore Health – Ashbourne Surgery

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.

This service scored 71 (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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. There were systems in place to highlight any specific individual needs, such as the requirement for longer appointments or for a translator to be present. Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. Clinical staff used templates when conducting care reviews to support the review of people’s wider health and wellbeing.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this mostly in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation.

Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was mostly provided in line with current guidance. However, national guidance to follow up people with asthma who had been prescribed 2 or more courses of steroids in last year was not always followed.

The service mostly worked well across teams and services to support people. The practice worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services. There was evidence of working with the wider health care teams though multi-disciplinary teams (MDT) meetings. Feedback from 3 care homes was mostly positive about the way the practice worked with them. Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support.

However, there had been a breakdown in the relationship between the practices within the Primary Care Network. Alternative care provision was under review.

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 patients’ health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives, people 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. Staff signposted people to initiatives to improve people’s health. For example, Live Well Derbyshire for weight management and smoking cessation.

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.

The uptake for cervical screening was 82%, this was above the national target of 80% and consistent over time. National data showed all 5 indicators for childhood immunisations had achieved the 90% minimum target of which 4 had met the 95% World Health Organisation based target. There were effective systems in place to follow up people who failed to attend for these appointments. From the clinical notes we reviewed, we found that people who used the service experienced positive outcomes as set out in legislation, standards, and evidence-based clinical guidance.

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