Wyke Regis and Lanehouse Medical Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive - We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs through good organisation and delivery.

At our last inspection, this key question was rated Good. At this assessment, the rating has remained Good.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People could share their experience of the service via Friends and Family Test (FFT) survey and the National GP-patient survey. We reviewed patient feedback via the practice’s most recent FFT survey and found positive results had been received. However, the National GP-patient results showed negative feedback relating to a lack of co-ordinated person-centred care, patient involvement with care planning, and people felt not listened to and treated with concern, against local and national average data. As a result, the practice had worked with the Patient Participation Group (PPG) to coordinate regular support sessions for people with digital access queries to troubleshoot issues and assist with submitting online access requests. The practice had also continued to work alongside and communicate with the local primary care network (PCN) to deliver care and review performance as part of the extended access arrangements. This included the housebound and care home service to improve the timeliness of care provided. We received feedback from local partners including local care homes, which identified positive themes of how they were supported and offered personable care to their residents.

Staff demonstrated awareness of how the practice considered patient preferences and how these were taken into consideration when co-ordinating care. Where appropriate, staff included carers and dependants and processes were in place to share decision making about their treatment.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had tailored its provision to meet the diverse needs of its community, for example, through additional services with Weymouth and Portland Primary Care Network (PCN). Multidisciplinary meetings were held regularly for patients with complex needs such as with community district nursing and community mental health services.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The practice had met the Accessible Information Standards. Reasonable adjustments were made at the practice to support communication needs, including the use of interpreters during consultations. Leaflets were available in the reception area and posters were displayed to provide patients with information on the practice and the different services available to them. Patients were also provided with information on how to access their medical records. A private room was available if patients were distressed or wanted to discuss sensitive issues. There were arrangements to ensure confidentiality at the reception desk and during telephone calls.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Information was displayed on the practice’s website and within premises to support people to share feedback and raise any concerns or complaints.

Staff encouraged patients to share their experiences of the service and supported them to raise concerns. Feedback and complaints were investigated and resolved in a timely manner. Staff were able to provide examples of learning and how the practice had improved from people’s experiences, such as the implementation of an administrative patient results processing system to assist in the review and filing of medical reports to reduce the waiting time for patient information to be made available. At the time of inspection, our clinical searches identified patient medical reports and results had been appropriately reviewed within timeframes recorded within practice policy.

During our assessment, we reviewed a sample of complaints and these were investigated and responded to appropriately in line with practice policy. Where appropriate, patients were provided with an apology and signposted to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman.

The service did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The practice’s National GP Patient Survey results from 2024 indicated people found it difficult to contact the practice via telephone and online, as well as speaking with their preferred healthcare professional when they would like to. Consequently, the practice scored lower than local and national averages.

However, leaders demonstrated they were aware of the challenges to patient access and had acted to improve this. We saw evidence of audits completed in relation to access performance, such as appointment capacity and demand data, appointment waiting times and patient ‘Did Not Attend’ (DNA) rates per GP to assess performance. This also helped provide oversight to rota management and staffing arrangements to meet access demand. The practice had also reviewed audits of telephone access data which included the total number of inbound calls daily; queue waiting times and call abandonments. We identified documented actions that had been taken to improve access to services such as additional administrative cover during increased demand and adjusting patient communication on the telephone queue system during busy periods.

The practice had implemented new systems and processes in September 2024 which meant allocated staff managed and reviewed online triage requests in order to streamline patients to designated clinical teams so people could receive care and treatment by the right person at the right time. Findings indicated the practice had ensured urgent requests were responded to in a timely manner. However, routine GP appointment and phlebotomy clinic waiting times were longer than current national averages. Themes from feedback received directly via CQC’s ‘Give Feedback on Care’ submissions and from staff at the practice highlighted the practice did not have enough staff to manage clinical care and administrative workload. However, senior leaders demonstrated the number of clinical sessions that were scheduled on average was meeting national guidelines.

Appointments were available face to face, telephone, or as a home visit. Patients could book appointments by telephone, online, walking-in and could also submit medical or admin requests online via the practice website. The practice offered extended access arrangements outside of normal working hours provided by a GP and a nurse practitioner on Saturday mornings and weekday evenings through the local primary care network (PCN). The practice had utilised PCN resources to provide a co-ordinated package of care, such as mental health practitioners, first contact physiotherapists and pharmacy technicians.

Patients’ accessibility and communication needs were recorded in their clinical records. Staff were trained in the care navigation process to ensure patients were directed to the most appropriate part of the service. Staff had access to the future care planning templates on the practice clinical records system which incorporated checks for patient’s wishes, mental capacity and any treatment escalation planning.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff told us they considered how they tailored care, support and treatment to individual needs. Staff told us if families had experienced a bereavement, the practice contacted them and an appointment was offered to discuss any further needs. Families were signposted to relevant support groups, such as the practice mental health support workers and social prescribers.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. Staff told us they had completed relevant awareness training in supporting people with learning disabilities, autism and dementia.

The provider had processes to ensure people could register at the practice, including those in vulnerable circumstances such as homeless people and Travellers. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not speak English or those who faced digital exclusion. The practice held a register of patients who were carers and offered annual health checks. We saw examples of local care initiatives to help support carers in the community.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Leaders understood the requirements of legislation when considering consent and decision-making and had access to policies to support them. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for their end-of-life care, including cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This information was shared with other services when necessary. Patients on the practice’s palliative care register were reviewed in monthly multi-disciplinary meetings. The practice had developed co-ordinated work with the local PCN to develop an Integrated Neighbourhood Teams which focused on accessibility for vulnerable people and people with frailty.