Dr Bouch and Partners Also known as Bridge Road 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.

This key question has been rated as good.

People were treated with kindness, compassion and dignity. Staff protected people’s privacy, treated people as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. The service supported staff wellbeing.

This service scored 80 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us they were treated with respect and dignity, and confirmed their privacy and confidentiality was maintained.National GP Patient Survey data reflected people felt listened to, were treated with care and had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional. People responded positively to the overall experience of the service.

Staff gave examples of how they treated people with kindness, respect and compassion. They were also aware of the importance of people’s confidentiality and gave examples of how this was maintained.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.

During the site visit we observed staff to be friendly and helpful with people at the reception desk and when supporting people by telephone. Arrangements were in place to support people’s privacy, for example during clinical appointments and when checking in for an appointment.

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

Practice staff had worked with a local not for profit organisation for children, young people and adults with disabilities to produce a short educational film. This was to support people who may be worried about accessing healthcare. The film included interviews, for example with a receptionist, nurse and GP, talking about their role in a GP practice. This was available for use by people at the service.

Staff provided several reasonable adjustments to support people with additional needs. For example, 1 nurse had supported 2 people with a learning disability, over several years, to complete cervical screening and supported a person with a physical disability to have screening at the service rather than the hospital. A further example included 2 people who were able to have a blood test after a desensitisation programme, which led to 1 of these people receiving appropriate treatment.

National GP Patient Survey data reflected people were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. People told us they were treated as individuals and feedback demonstrated people were confident that staff understood their individual needs.

Staff were required to undertake specific training to improve their own knowledge and understanding of how to support people. All staff had completed equality, diversity and human rights and learning disability and autism awareness training to level 1. Nearly half of the staff had completed level 2 face to face training. Service leaders had engaged with the Integrated Care Board (ICB) regarding access to the face-to-face element of this training.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Feedback we received was positive with people’s individual needs and choices being considered and respected during care and treatment decisions.

Staff supported people to make informed decisions about their care and treatment, and when appropriate with their carers. This included discussions about care and treatment options to decide on what would work best. Staff helped people and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services.

There were systems and processes in place to promote people’s independence and control over their care and treatment. Information was available at the service and on their website which advised people how to access a range of support groups and organisations, which included wellbeing, dementia, cancer and drug and alcohol support.People could self-refer to a range of services which included for example, physiotherapy and vasectomy clinics.

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.

Staff knew how to respond to people’s immediate needs and how to recognise when urgent help or support was required. Staff told us about systems and training in place to support this, which included guidance and training on sepsis,the use of an alert button on the computer system, and the availability of emergency medicines and equipment. All staff had completed training in basic life support and anaphylaxis appropriate to their role.

Arrangements were in place to manage emergencies and a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs, including mental health needs, had access to services. The service had a duty GP available every day to respond to for example, NHS111 appointment requests, ambulance and hospital queries, to review and act on urgent requests and respond to people’s immediate needs as necessary.

People who provided feedback for this assessment advised they were able to get an on the day or urgent appointment if needed. People had shared positive feedback with the service regarding the care and treatment they received in response to their immediate needs.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to deliver person-centred care. Staff gave examples of fundraising activities, which leaders supported, where money raised was donated to local causes, for example, The Deaf Association, veterans, and the food bank.

Leaders had taken steps to meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as lone working and home visit arrangements. Staff told us they felt supported by leaders and could approach them at any time for advice and guidance. Some staff gave examples of support they had received. For example, clinical staff who regularly carried out home visits had been provided with a rucksack instead of a hand‑carry bag. Staff had access to wellbeing and mental health support. Leaders supported staff with professional development and career progression.