Salters Medical Practice

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 practice 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. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning of their care needs. Patients told us they felt involved in decisions about their care.

The practice had an exceptional understanding of the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. For example, the practice adjusted the delivery of its service to meet the needs of people with a learning disability by providing appointments for annual health checks when the practice was quiet. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. The practice had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of its community. For example, they held weekly clinics with a drug and alcohol service with their engagement and recovery worker. Following this, the lead GP and the engagement and recovery worker held face-to-face appointments every 12 weeks with the patients. The practice also held parent and baby clinics with a GP and practice nurse for immunisations and a post-natal appointment.

The practice supplied 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. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

The practice 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. Patient feedback was collected through a variety of methods such as online, in person and through the NHS Friends and Family Test. The practice had a compliments procedure as they recognised the importance of sharing positive feedback. The practice had a complaints policy in line with recognised guidance. However, not all patients were made aware of how to seek support if they were not satisfied with the response. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback.

The practice made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community, the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example, they ran a support clinic in the waiting room to increase registration to online services and the use of the NHS app. This resulted in more patients engaging with the practice digitally. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. The practice had a system in place which ensured there were appointments available on the day, and bookable in advance with a variety of different clinicians. Patients could be seen face to face or could book a telephone appointment. The practice offered enhanced access appointments including Saturday clinics every 5-6 weeks.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. Leaders proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improving people’s experience and worked with local organisations, including within the voluntary sector, to address any local health inequalities. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. For example, they engaged with people using their preferred contact method. 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.

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. 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.