Dr Kent and Partners

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 monitored people’s care and treatment and supported them to live healthier lives. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains 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.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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. For example, to support mental health, the service introduced an art therapy programme, which resulted in artwork being created for the practice and was subsequently adopted by the local hospital.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves.

The service met national targets for the uptake of childhood immunisations but did not meet national targets for the uptake of cervical screening, achieving 77% against a target of 80%. However, performance was close to the required thresholds, and the provider was implementing actions to improve uptake. For example, to reduce barriers to booking appointments, the service introduced a system whereby text message reminders included a link, enabling patients to book directly without needing to contact the practice by telephone.

Clinical and non-clinical audits were carried out to improve outcomes for patients. For example, the service carried out a clinical audit of antibiotic prescribing for the treatment of ear infections. Following the audit, the provider took steps to complete identified actions and prescribing rates were reduced from 77% to 73%. The service continued to review performance and seek further improvement.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.