Wolstanton Medical Centre

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

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 79 (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.

Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of people including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed people were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. Extended appointments were available for those who needed them, and the service accommodated people had specific needs around where they waited for appointments and when they were seen.

Staff took a holistic view when carrying out long-term condition reviews and worked with people to help them understand how their lifestyle impacted on their condition. Staff shared an example of the positive impact made on a person’s life when they worked with them on correct medication usage and lifestyle changes.

Feedback from people who used the service demonstrated the service’s commitment to person centred care. They told us the partners gave them as much time as they needed during consultations. Some people were seen proactively on a regular basis to help them sustain appropriate behaviours to support their health and monitor their health conditions, or to help manage their health anxieties.

The national GP Patient survey results found 96% of people who responded to the survey stated they felt listened to by the healthcare professional during their last appointment, this was above the national average of 87%.

The service provided care and treatment to a care home which supported people with learning disability or autism. The care home representative told us they had built a good rapport with the practice over the years, which helped their service users to feel at ease, and comfortable. The relationship with the GP allowed the service users to receive any treatment or tests they required, which had a positive impact on their health and wellbeing.

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. For example, the expansion of the primary care network (PCN) care co-ordinator’s role to support vulnerable older people to coordinate the service they may require resulted in the creation of The FACT service, a PCN-level enhanced frailty service with one of the GP Partners as the clinical lead. The FACT team includes a dedicated care coordinator, advanced nurse practitioner, social prescriber and pharmacy team member, to review, assess, follow up and support the enhanced care needs of people referred to them from PCN practices.

There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare provider.

The service was exceptional at developing appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. People were informed as to how to access their care records. Information for people using the service was available on display boards within the waiting rooms.

The service had developed a range of postcards to support people to know how to access services and the importance of screening programmes. Postcards were included in the new patient packs (general and new baby) and available for cervical and bowel cancer screening.

The service had dedicated sections on the website for people with a learning disability and / or autism and the LGBTQIA+ community. These sections provided useful information for people to reduce anxiety when attending the service, including videos showing people around the building to different areas, as well as information on external support and services.

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.

Complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy. Information on how to escalate concerns was shared with people in the service response and in the complaints leaflet. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

We saw the service reacted positively to feedback from families following the outcome of complaints. The service shared the response from a recent complaint and told us they had identified further improvements which could be made. These included the benefits of developing a clear shared understanding of care needs and support, and how to access different care provisions. The service had accessed relevant information from the local NHS Trust and planned to develop an additional information postcard/pack to support people and their families.

The service routinely asked people to complete Friends and Family Test feedback forms and reviewed the feedback for any trends or themes. The results and comments were used to improve the service. The service shared the monthly summary of what went well, what could be improved and action taken with people on the website.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone, and a range of different appointment types were available. The online consultation form was available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The service offered on the day and prebookable appointments. The service monitored the use of book on day, routine and online form appointment slots and released the routine appointments in a staggered way to ensure there were always bookable appointments released each day. Staff told us the rotas were monitored daily and unused appointment slots converted to book on the day when applicable, to maximise capacity. If people requested an on the day appoint when none were available, they were triaged by the duty GP. The service could book people into appointments provided by the GP Federation between 4pm and 8pm every weekday and 9am and 4pm on Saturdays.

The service had completed a capacity and demand quality improvement project. This enabled the service to plan the number of appointments and staff levels in response to demand. There was ongoing monitoring to identify any changes that may be required. The most recent review highlighted a number of actions including reviewing staffing schedules to align resources with demand, additional training and support for increased digital service use, promote the NHS App and online consultation and continue to monitor call waiting times and appointment availability.

The service carried out annual surveys on access. The most recent results indicated people were satisfied with access to the service, could get appointments and / or advice quickly and were aware of the range of different methods to contact the service.

The National GP Patient Survey results was extremely positive about their experience of contacting the service and accessing appointments. The National GP Patient Survey results found 93% of people who responded to the survey were positive about their overall experience of contacting the practice, this was significantly above the national average of 70%. In addition, 72% were positive about how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone, above the national average of 53%.

Consulting and treatment rooms as well as waiting rooms were spread across the ground and first floors. Staff told us people with mobility issues were seen in rooms on the ground floor. There was ramped access to the building with electronic access doors. Handrails were available both sides of the ramp, which was covered with a non-slip surface. Facilities for disabled people included a disabled toilet, disabled parking and raised high backed chairs. Baby changing facilities were available and breast feeding welcomed within the service.

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.

The service recognised that people may face barriers to accessing GP services not necessarily in terms of physical access to the premises, but in terms of understanding, communication, or engagement with healthcare services. To ensure equitable access and high-quality care, the practice had implemented a number of measures. These included offering appointment types suited to the people’s specific needs, including longer appointments for people with multiple or complex issues, signposting to relevant services and support organisations, referring to the social prescriber and health and wellbeing coach, and postcards with relevant information on how to access services.

The service had reviewed people who contacted the practice multiple times in a short period of time and considered if they could provide better support for these individuals. Additional support included scheduled follow up with the same GP, using a triage first approach for people booking repeated on the day appointments when not always clinically needed, and recognition that the person may be entering a palliative phase. In addition, the GPs booked regular routine appointments to support people with health anxieties or additional needs.

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 have access to the internet.

Although the practice promoted the use of the NHS App and online consultation tools, staff recognised that not everyone could or wished to use digital systems.
Alternative access routes were maintained, including telephone and in person contact.

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. People who required additional care and support were discussed during practice meeting as well as at regular multi-disciplinary team meetings. All deaths were reviewed routinely to identify any learning. The service told us these reviews had identified a gap in routine reviews for people with chronic degenerative neurological conditions. As a consequence, the service proactively invited this group of people for routine reviews with the aim to identify any additional needs promptly.

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.