Dr H W Ng & Partner Also known as Scott Park 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 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.

Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity.

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 did not always treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity.

Staff described arrangements to promote people’s privacy, including private consultation rooms however examination rooms did not contain privacy curtains. The service had implemented the use of separate lockable examination rooms as an alternative to privacy curtains. However, this arrangement did not fully preserve people’s privacy and dignity during intimate examinations, as people were required to get off the examination couch to unlock the examination room door from the inside to admit the clinician. The provider had undertaken a risk assessment and staff told us they ensured privacy whilst people were preparing for an examination. Following the site visit, the provider submitted an action plan to advise they would install a privacy curtain in the treatment room. People were able to have private discussions away from public areas. Staff understood the importance of maintaining confidentiality and safeguarding people’s dignity.

The service performed better than the national average in the results of the 2026 National GP Patient Survey. This showed people felt listened to and felt they were treated with kindness. For example, 95% of respondents to the survey felt the healthcare professional at their last appointment was good at treating them with care and concern, compared to a national average of 86%. This was mirrored in feedback from people we spoke with during our assessment.

We did not look at Treating people as individuals during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Responding to people’s immediate needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

We did not look at Workforce wellbeing and enablement during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.