Handforth Health Centre

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 involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this.
At our last inspection, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains.
 

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 practice assessed people's needs in a timely and personalised way. Systems were in place to identify patients who may require additional support, including carers, people living with long-term conditions and those at risk of poorer health outcomes. Staff used coded records and structured review processes to help ensure patients received appropriate assessment and follow up.
The practice used a proactive approach to identifying health needs and risks. Weekly reviews of care home residents, structured monitoring of long-term conditions and regular discussion of vulnerable patients helped ensure changes in people's health were recognised at an early stage. Staff told us patients requiring additional support were identified through daily clinical contacts, registration processes and information received from partner organisations, enabling care to be planned around individual needs.
The practice had robust recall systems to support ongoing assessment and preventative care. People who did not attend reviews were followed up using a range of communication methods, and additional steps were taken where concerns remained. This helped reduce the risk of patients missing important assessments or health checks.
 

The practice delivered care and treatment in line with current evidence and national guidance. Clinical outcomes appeared strong, with the practice providing unverified data that demonstrated performance was above national averages across a range of long-term conditions, including diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, heart disease and mental health conditions.
Leaders used audits and quality improvement activity to review clinical practice and identify opportunities for improvement. We saw evidence where the practice had identified a decline in cervical screening uptake, investigated the causes and strengthened recall arrangements. This resulted in a substantial improvement in uptake and demonstrated the provider's ability to respond when outcomes were not where they should be.
Clinical staff maintained their skills through continuing professional development, regular clinical updates and professional registration requirements. The practice also benefited from access to specialist expertise, including a GP with a specialist interest in diabetes, which supported evidence-based decision making and improved patient care.
 

The practice worked effectively with a range of health, social care and community services to support coordinated care. Staff described good communication between teams and clear arrangements for sharing information when patients required support from multiple services.
Regular multidisciplinary meetings were used to discuss vulnerable patients, safeguarding concerns and people receiving end of life care. These meetings brought together professionals from different organisations, helping ensure decisions were informed by a shared understanding of patients' needs.
The practice had strengthened systems for managing referrals and clinical correspondence. Administrative and clinical staff monitored actions through electronic workflow systems, and urgent referrals were followed up where necessary. These arrangements reduced the risk of delays and helped ensure important actions were completed.
 

The practice took a proactive approach to helping people improve and maintain their health. Staff promoted screening programmes, vaccinations and health checks to support early identification of illness and reduce the risk of avoidable disease.
The practice worked closely with social prescribing services and community organisations to support wider wellbeing. Patients could be referred for help with issues such as social isolation, lifestyle changes, financial concerns and access to local support networks. This helped address factors that can affect people's health beyond medical treatment alone.
The provider also targeted preventative activity where uptake was lower. For example, it offered additional cervical screening appointments and promoted community-based opportunities to improve access and encourage participation in screening programmes.
 

The practice monitored the quality and effectiveness of care and used this information to improve patient outcomes. Leaders reviewed performance data, clinical indicators and audit findings to assess service performance and identify areas where improvements were required.
Unverified data provided by the practice indicated positive clinical outcomes across a range of areas, including learning disabilities, mental health and dementia. This provided assurance that patients with long-term conditions and complex health needs were receiving appropriate reviews and ongoing support.
The practice used clinical audits to monitor performance, identify areas for improvement and embed learning. Where audits highlighted gaps in practice, action was taken to improve outcomes. For example, a clinical audit of Testosterone Replacement Therapy (TRT) monitoring in male patients identified an opportunity to improve compliance with monitoring requirements. A subsequent re-audit demonstrated a 25% improvement, resulting in 100% of patients prescribed testosterone replacement therapy receiving monitoring in line with current clinical guidance. This demonstrated that the practice used audit findings effectively to drive and sustain improvements in care.
 

The practice supported people to make informed decisions about their care and treatment. Staff took steps to ensure patients understood information about their care and treatment before decisions were made. This included adapting communication and providing additional support where required.This helped ensure patients understood the information provided and could participate in decisions about their care.
Records we reviewed demonstrated that consent processes were generally well documented. Decisions relating to future care planning and resuscitation were supported by clinical rationale and showed appropriate involvement of patients or their representatives where possible. Where patients lacked capacity, records demonstrated consideration of relevant legal requirements.
Staff understood their responsibilities regarding consent, confidentiality and mental capacity. Patients receiving end of life care were involved in discussions about future treatment and care preferences, helping ensure care reflected their wishes and individual circumstances.