Middlestown Medical Centre Also known as Dr Swan and Partners

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 practice involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity, and respect. We saw that the provider worked with people to involve them in decisions about their care, and had measures and processes in place to treat them with respect and dignity.

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.

The provider treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

Staff told us that rooms were available to patients for private discussions about their health concerns at all 3 sites, which meant they did not need to raise personal issues directly at a reception desk. The main site waiting area for example had a television playing which helped mask private conversations and improve confidentiality. The needs of patients with a disability were considered and reception desks had drop down sections suitable for wheelchair users, and hearing loops were available.

National GP Patient Survey data showed that people felt listened to and were treated with kindness. For example, in 2025 91% of respondents said that the healthcare professional they saw or spoke with was good at listening to them during their last appointment. This compared to local and national averages of 87%. Furthermore, 91% of respondents said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke with was good at treating them with care and concern during their last appointment. This compared to local and national average figures of 86%.

From feedback we received from a member of staff from a partner organisation hosted at the practice, we were informed that staff had treated them with respect and supported them in their work.

The practice treated people as individuals, and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met their needs and preferences. Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met.

When required the provider made reasonable adjustments both for patients and staff. We saw that the communication needs of patients were met. For example, translation and interpretation support could be organised, and hearing loops were available. The specific needs of patients were coded within their records allowing staff to more easily understand and plan for their needs. Staff we spoke with were well informed and had processes in place to meet the cultural and religious requirements of their patient population.

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

Results from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey saw 93% of respondents say they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last general practice appointment. This was slightly above the local and national averages of 91%.

The provider operated an open access appointment system which used patient demand data to effectively plan staffing levels, and which as a result offered high levels of both on the day/urgent appointments and planned appointments. Part of the initial appointment process was based on the patient’s choice for care, and whether in their view the appointment was urgent or more routine. Care navigation and clinical triage was used to ensure these choice-based appointment requests were safe and appropriate. Patient choice was also extended as the provider had 3 operating sites from which care could be delivered. The main site at Middlestown Medical Centre operated from 8am until 6.30pm, whilst the 2 branch sites operated over more restricted hours. Patients could also access extended hours services during the evenings and weekends at another site in the Wakefield area.

During appointments clinicians had more time available to spend with patients and discuss all their needs in a holistic, person-centred manner, patients were not limited to raising 1 concern during an appointment. In addition to increased clinician contact time, patients had increased choice regarding the timing, location, and type of appointment available to them. An example of this extended choice was evidenced in the National GP Patient Survey which showed that 72% of patients were offered a choice of time or day when they last tried to make an appointment, compared to a local average of 55% and a national average of 54%.

Feedback we received from a patient said that the provider supported their individual care and health needs, and enabled them to manage their conditions with advice and medication support.

The practice listened to and understood patient’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to patient’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. Due to the development of their open access appointment system, we saw that requests for appointments and appointment type were initially based on patient choice, but were subject to assessment via care navigation and clinical triage to ensure patients received appropriate and responsive care.

Staff we spoke with knew how to respond when a patient needed immediate or urgent attention. There were systems in place to support this, including the use of panic alarms, and availability of emergency equipment. During our review of staff training records, we saw that staff had received training in basic life support and sepsis awareness. Staff were also aware how to support patients in need of emergency support including calls for transfer to accident and emergency, and referral to specialist mental health services.

The practice cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. The provider had recognised the critical importance of valuing and supporting staff wellbeing and development. To support this the practice had adopted formal speak up and whistleblowing procedures, and had in place appraisals and more informal contacts with staff when their wellbeing or any concerns could be discussed. This was reiterated to us by staff who said that they found senior managers and line managers friendly and supportive. Staff with other concerns were able to access help and advice through a health and wellbeing assistance programme which included a 24/7 helpline.

The provider and staff also informed us of a number of measures and events organised by, and centred on the practice to build the practice team as well as giving opportunities to socialise. This included meals out and organised walks, informal social gatherings and celebrations, and themed events such as a murder mystery team building activity. The provider also hosted an annual recognition event where staff were able to nominate colleagues.

Staff we spoke with also mentioned that they felt listened to by the management team, and that they were free to make suggestions or request adjustments and flexibilities to meet their specific needs. The provider shared with us examples when staff suggestions had been acted upon including the provision of a more discreet samples deposit box, and improvements to health awareness raising materials.

Other formal polices were in place to support staff. These included lone working, bullying and harassment and zero tolerance policies.