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

This service scored 83 (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 always made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by thoroughly assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. There were systems and processes in place to identify patient’s needs and preferences. Reception staff were aware of the needs of the local community as digital flags and codes were used on the patient record to highlight any specific needs such as requirement for a longer appointment or the need for a translator. Carers were identified and supported with appointment flexibility to accommodate their caring responsibilities.Sensory items were available for patients that wanted to use them. The practice met the accessible information standard. For example, a hearing loop was present, and interpretation services were available. Photographs of staff with their name and role were displayed on the wall inside the practice to help patients become more familiar with the clinicians. Staff could refer patients with social needs to the social prescriber within the primary care network. For example, those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties. Staff checked people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs during health reviews. Feedback from those that completed the National GP Patient Survey highlighted that 97% of patients felt their needs were met during their last GP appointment, 99%of patients felt the healthcare professional they saw had all the information they needed about them during their last GP appointment and 100% of patients had confidence and trust in their healthcare professional they saw during their last GP appointment. All these results were higher than the local and national average.

The practice planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. There were systems in place to ensure staff were up to date with relevant legislation, evidence-based practice and required standards. The clinical records reviewed showed that care was in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice. Multi-disciplinary team meetings were had to ensure staff were updated with the latest information, guidance and changes within the practice. Education sessions led by the practice team provided a structured opportunity for shared learning amongst staff. Clinicians presented patient cases and audits, encouraging open discussion and reflection. This multidisciplinary, peer-led approach fostered collaboration, innovation, and improved clinical practice, ensuring all staff were delivering evidence-based care and treatment.

One of our clinical records searches reviewed the number of patients with asthma who had been prescribed two or more courses of rescue steroids in the last 12 months. We identified a total of 91 patients and reviewed a random sample of 5 patient records and found all patients had been followed up appropriately and had received an adequate annual asthma review which included providing the patient with an asthma care plan. Another clinical record search identified 593 patients with hypothyroidism (an under active thyroid where the thyroid gland does not produce enough hormones). We reviewed a random sample of 5 patient records and found that only 1 patient was overdue monitoring, This had already been identified by the practice, and the patient had been contacted.

The practice worked well across teams and services to support patients. Information was shared between teams and services to enable continuity of care and ensure patients only had to tell their story once when moving between different services. Teams could contact each other through various communication methods. The teams were supportive of each other to ensure they had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The practice had a good relationship with other practices within the primary care network and worked well together to share knowledge to improve patient care. Meeting minutes were recorded in detail and were shared on their electronic system so all staff could access. To ensure staff were able to work together effectively, the practice adopted an open-door policy to encourage staff to speak up so that any queries were resolved to ensure a positive working environment. Each staff member knew their role and responsibilities.

The practice always supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. They supported patients to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support by sharing advice and guidance. Patients were encouraged to take an active role in reviewing their own health and wellbeing so they would recognise changes to their health and wellbeing. Staff members were able to advise and signpost patients to the appropriate services to improve or maintain patients care. For example, the practice utilised the Pershore Wellbeing Hub that offered many supporting activities and advice to improve people’s health. The practice could refer patients to the social prescriber where patients could spend time with a wellbeing coach. The social prescribing team promoted a swimming group for individuals with disabilities based at a local leisure centre. Health promotion material was observed in the practice and further information could be found on their website that supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health by supporting people. Health and care videos were also accessible on their website that included videos about ‘why is self-care important.’ The practice engaged with Healthwatch Worcestershire to focus on priorities like cardiovascular health, diabetes and frailty.

The practice established ‘The Abbottswood Fund,’ this charity was used to support members of the community. For example, the charity supported Wick Care Farm that worked with adults and young people to help improve confidence, skills and mental health through therapeutic activity. The Abbottswood Fund also created ‘Singing for Health’ and mindfulness sessions to support people with long covid, COPD, breathlessness, anxiety, isolation or low mood. The Abbottswood Fund also collaborated with local organisations to join the ‘St Andrew’s Garden Project’ which was a community garden initiative to create a sensory green space to benefit people’s mental and physical wellbeing.

Findings from the clinical search records indicated that the practice routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it and ensured that both clinical and patient expectations were met. From the clinical notes we reviewed, we found that people who used the service experienced positive outcomes as set out in legislation, standards, and evidence-based clinical guidance.

At the time of our assessment, the latest published information from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) showed that the practice met the World Health Organisation minimum 90% target for the number of children immunised against various infectious childhood diseases such as children aged 5 who should have received immunisations for measles, mumps and rubella. The latest published information from NHS Digital showed the practice’s uptake of cervical cancer screening for women aged 25 to 49 years old was below the 80% national target and was observed as 75.3%. The practice’s uptake of cervical cancer screening for women aged 50 to 64 years old was below the 80% national target and was observed as 77.1%. Staff told us they were engaging with patients who had not attended to encourage them to attend their cervical cancer screening. For example, cervical screening information was shared through their social media page, and the practice offered different appointment times with the aim to promote and encourage patients to attend.

The practice told patients about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff had a detailed understanding of consent. Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Staff understood the importance of ensuring that people fully understood what they were consenting to and respected the importance of obtaining consent before they delivered care or treatment. Patients received information about care and treatment in a way they could understand. Patient’s capacity and ability to consent was considered and clearly recorded. Chaperones were available upon request. This information was on display in the form of posters in the consultation rooms. Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were appropriate and were made in line with relevant legislation.