Handforth Health Centre

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.
At our last inspection, 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.

People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion. Feedback from patients was consistently positive and reflected a caring culture throughout the practice. National GP Patient Survey results were significantly above national averages, with 97% of respondents saying healthcare professionals treated them with care and concern, compared to a national average of 86%. The majority of respondents (97%) reported their needs were met, compared to a national average of 90%.
Feedback from Healthwatch, the PPG, Friends and Family Test responses and compliments was also positive. Patients described staff as caring, professional and supportive. The PPG spoke positively about the practice and described constructive relationships with leaders and staff. Staff demonstrated an understanding of the importance of maintaining dignity and confidentiality and could describe how private areas were made available when sensitive discussions were required.
The practice provided additional support to patients when required. For example, vulnerable patients received proactive follow up and home visits where appropriate, and staff maintained contact with patients who experienced delays or difficulties accessing services. These actions helped people feel supported and reassured during periods of uncertainty or concern.
 

The practice recognised that people had different needs and adapted care accordingly. Reasonable adjustments were identified, recorded and communicated to staff through patient records. Patients could access longer appointments, alternative communication methods, quiet spaces and alternative consultation methods, helping ensure care was delivered in a way that met their individual circumstances.
Staff took a personalised approach when supporting people who were less likely to engage with services. Rather than relying on a standard recall process, clinicians used tailored follow up arrangements and additional contact where needed. The practice also worked with social prescribing services and community organisations to support patients whose needs extended beyond healthcare alone.
Patients told the practice they felt involved in decisions about their care and treatment. This was reflected in National GP Patient Survey results, where 97% of respondents reported being involved as much as they wanted in decisions about their care, above the national average of 92%.
 

The practice supported people to make informed choices about their care and treatment. Patients could access appointments in different ways, including face-to-face, telephone and video consultations, enabling them to choose an approach that best suited their needs. Staff supported patients to understand information about their care and treatment so they could make informed choices.
Patients were encouraged to take an active role in managing their health. The practice signposted people to social prescribing services, lifestyle support programmes and community organisations that could help improve wellbeing and maintain independence. Carers were identified and supported, helping them continue in their caring role while maintaining their own health and wellbeing.
Decisions about future care were made in partnership with patients and, where appropriate, their families. Records we reviewed demonstrated that discussions about end of life care and resuscitation decisions considered people's wishes, capacity and individual circumstances. This helped ensure decisions reflected what mattered most to the person receiving care.
 

The practice responded promptly to people who required urgent care. Patients requesting help were assessed through a GP-led triage system supported by trained care navigation staff, helping ensure they were directed to the most appropriate clinician or service without unnecessary delay. Staff understood how to escalate concerns and could access immediate clinical advice where they were worried about a patient's condition. The practice had also introduced an early morning triage model to improve access and provide earlier assessment for patients needing same-day support.
Patients told us they received clear information about what would happen next when contacting the practice. National GP Patient Survey results were significantly above national averages, with 98% compared to 84% nationally of respondents saying they knew the next step after contacting the practice and 99% compared with 93% nationally saying they knew what would happen within 2 days. In addition, 96% compared to 73% nationally reported a good overall experience of contacting the practice. These results indicate that patients generally received timely responses and understood how their needs would be managed.
The practice took additional steps to support people who might be at greater risk of poor outcomes if care was delayed. Vulnerable patients were proactively followed up where required, urgent referrals were monitored and chased when necessary, and reasonable adjustments were available to help people access care in a way that met their individual needs. Feedback from staff described an inclusive, supportive and open culture where patients’ needs were prioritised, and the PPG also provided positive feedback about the responsiveness of the service. Together, this demonstrated a practice that was focused on ensuring people received care and support when they needed it.
 

The caring culture experienced by patients was reflected in the experiences of staff. Staff consistently described the practice as supportive, inclusive and open. They told us leaders were approachable, listened to concerns and promoted a culture where people felt valued and respected. Staff also said they felt comfortable raising concerns and were confident they would be listened to and supported.
Leaders demonstrated a proactive approach to staff wellbeing. Staff had access to support through appraisals, welfare discussions and regular engagement with managers and GP partners. We saw examples where leaders used support, discussion and mediation to resolve concerns and improve working relationships.
The practice had established Freedom to Speak Up arrangements and staff were aware of the support available to them. Positive staff feedback, alongside evidence of an inclusive and collaborative culture, gave us confidence that the wellbeing of staff was valued and that people were supported to provide compassionate care.