Oldfield Surgery

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 assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 70 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us they felt listened to and supported by staff. Feedback from the service’s previous months Friends and Family Test showed that out of 407 responses, 379 gave “very good” or “good” ratings, for their overall experience of the service, with comments praising staff’s empathy and attentiveness. One person said reception staff were “respectful and attentive” and described vaccination clinics as “efficient, friendly and cheerful”. Observations during our onsite visit confirmed staff maintained privacy and created a welcoming environment. Arrangements were in place to promote privacy. Staff we spoke with understood Gillick competency and there was a process to ensure young adults had control over their own privacy and the amount of parental involvement in managing their care and support.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took into account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Staff adapted care to suit personal circumstances, including offering home visits for people who were housebound and outreach clinics for people experiencing homelessness. Feedback from people who used the service said staff explained procedures clearly and answered questions, helping people feel involved in decisions. The service offered some flexible appointment times, including early mornings and additional clinics on weekends, to meet diverse needs.

The service did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People’s experiences of using the service varied. Some people told us they felt involved in decisions, while others said they did not always have enough time in appointments to discuss their options or were unsure whether they could see a clinician of their choice. Leaders were aware of this and were looking at ways to ensure people were involved in more decisions about their care.

The availability of accessible information was limited across both sites. We did not see information be provided in different languages or formats, and there was little information displayed about interpreter services. However, information about the service on their website was available in 20 different languages, and staff knew how to access interpreter services and could print off leaflets for people during their appointments in a variety of languages. The signing in screen to alert staff that a person had arrived for an appointment was available in English, Polish and Spanish.

Feedback from the service’s patient participation group highlighted concerns about digital exclusion for older people and the need for stronger support for carers. The service flagged an alert of people's records who had been identified as needing support to book appointments, and those with caring responsibilities.

People we spoke with during our onsite visit said staff explained treatment clearly, listened to their concerns and sought their views during consultations.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

The service’s same-day online triage system was praised by staff, and people using the service for improving access and reducing delays. Examples of the service’s Friends and Family Test comments described the system as “easy to use” and “quick”, with many people receiving same-day appointments. Staff acted quickly to arrange referrals and follow-up care, and the 2025 National GP Patient Survey results showed 81% of respondents understood next steps after contacting the service. Extended clinics on evenings and Saturdays further demonstrated responsiveness to demand.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

The service conducted staff surveys to check how their staff are doing, fix problems, and improve the service. The service’s most recent survey results showed 88% of staff felt their opinions were taken seriously and 94% were aware of wellbeing services. Leaders gave examples of how they had acted on previous staff feedback by introducing pay uplifts, offering flexible meeting formats to improve communication and creating new career pathways, such as offering an apprenticeship in nursing. Staff told us they felt well supported, valued by leaders, and confident raising concerns. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, providing resources and facilities for safe working, including regular breaks and designated rest areas within the service. Staff reported they were supported if they were struggling at work, and we saw evidence of team-building days being established within the service.