Fulwood Green 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

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. We assessed all quality statements from this key question. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. The rating remains good following this assessment.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Patients reporting symptoms suggestive of a clinical emergency were prioritised for same-day appointments or directed to a more appropriate service. All requests for appointments were triaged by the duty doctor who prioritised patients who reported symptoms that could be considered a clinical emergency. Patients were told when they needed to seek further help and what to do if their condition deteriorated. Staff could refer people with social needs, such as those experiencing social isolation or housing difficulties, to a social prescriber.

Relevant information was routinely shared with other professionals when planning care and treatment, and patient records were updated promptly to reflect any changes. Those living with long-term conditions or learning disabilities were invited for regular reviews, supported by structured templates to ensure care was comprehensive and consistent. The provider had effective systems in place to identify patients with potentially undiagnosed conditions, such as diabetes or cancer. Clinically vulnerable individuals were prioritised, and the practice worked closely with other healthcare professionals to deliver well-coordinated care.

The results of the National GP Patient Survey were overall very positive. For example, 91% of patients said they felt that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. Results indicated that 98% felt the healthcare professional they saw had all the information they needed about them, compared to 92% nationally and 93% felt their needs were met during their last general practice appointment, compared to 92% nationally.

People who used the service were given the opportunity to provide feedback to CQC via a link sent to patients as a text message. We received feedback from 218 people and 88% were positive about how the service was meeting and had met their needs.

There were systems to ensure staff were up to date with relevant legislation, evidence-based practice and required standards.Our clinical searches indicated that people received care, treatment and support that was evidenced based and was in line with good practice standards. Appropriate monitoring and reviews were in place for people with long term conditions. The management of patients with diabetes, asthma who had been prescribed 2 or more courses of rescue steroids was good. We identified that annual reviews were carried out effectively however, for a small number of reviews records we looked at for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and hypothyroidism, monitoring of these patients required improving. We discussed this with the provider at the time of assessment who took immediate actions. The experience of people who used the service as indicated in the National GP Patient Survey showed that 95% of respondents (compared to 92% nationally) stated that during their last appointment they had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan and deliver people’s care, treatment and support. When people moved between services, all necessary staff, teams and services were involved in assessing their needs to maintain continuity of care. Leaders and staff worked closely with colleagues in the local primary care network (PCN) to meet the needs of the patient population. Multi- disciplinary meetings were held on a regular basis so that when people received care from a range of different staff, teams or services, this was co-ordinated.

Staff supported people to manage their own health, care and wellbeing needs, and make healthier choices. Staff focused on identifying risks to people’s health and wellbeing, for example, people in the last 12 months of their lives and people at risk of developing a long-term condition. Members of the clinical team provided patients with information and support to manage their own health, care and wellbeing where possible. People were also encouraged and supported to make healthier choices to help promote and maintain their health and wellbeing and prevent deterioration.

The service supported national priorities and initiatives to improve the population’s health, including stop smoking and tackling obesity campaigns. Patients were encouraged to attend cancer screening and take up vaccinations offered as part of national programmes. The service was just below target for the percentage of persons eligible for cervical cancer screening who were screened adequately within 3.5 years for persons aged 25 to 49, and within 5.5 years for persons aged 50 to 64. The service told us they were working to increase uptake of cervical screening across the relevant patient population. Staff were contacting patients proactively to encourage them to attend, and specific cervical screening clinics were being scheduled.

The provider had effective approaches to monitoring people’s care and treatment, and their outcomes. Clinical and non-clinical audits were carried out to improve outcomes for patients. Patients who required monitoring underwent regular checks on their health. The service was in line with other services within the locality and nationally for outcomes for patients. Regular searches of patient’s medicines were undertaken by the service pharmacists to ensure safe prescribing and to ensure appropriate checks had been undertaken for patients. Depending on the results, patients were supported with additional advice and care to manage their long-term conditions.

People who used the service felt they could make an informed decision about their care and treatment because they had been provided with the information, they needed to support them to do so. The National GP Patient Survey results indicated showed that 91% of respondents had stated that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment, this was in line with national figures. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of ensuring that people fully understood what they were consenting to and the importance of obtaining consent before they delivered care or treatment. There was a system in place to record people’s consent appropriately. People’s capacity and ability to consent was considered. People, or persons lawfully acting on their behalf were involved in planning, managing and reviewing their care and treatment.

We sampled a small number of patient records with a do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation (DNACPR) decision, appropriate and completed records were observed.