Haiderian 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 staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with 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 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Assessing needs during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff focussed on identifying risks to people’s health, including those in the last 12 months of their lives and those with caring responsibilities. Staff supported national priorities and initiatives to improve population health, including stopping smoking and tackling obesity. For example, regular meetings with the palliative care team, improving the waiting room to ensure people living with dementia had a better experience, and workshops to improve inhaler use for patients with asthma and education for patients with diabetes.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive, consistent and met the expectations of people themselves. They had a rolling program of audits to assess compliance with monitoring and safe prescribing guidelines, for example safeguarding children, palliative care, mental health capacity, prescribing asthma and oral prednisolone to ensure good outcomes for patients.

In response to previous poor uptake, of childhood immunisations, the practice introduced personalised GP letters to improve engagement among non-responders. This was complemented by an patient-authored illustrated children’s book (“Crimble”) to help families understand and feel more comfortable with 3-year-old immunisations.

The practice achievement for Childhood immunisations (1 April 2024 – 31 March 2025 was positive): Uptake ranged from 89% to 98%, just below the 95% national target across all four programmes. For cervical screening (same period) the uptake exceeded 75% in both areas, slightly under the 80% national target.

The service performed above the England average in relation to several cancer screening programmes, including screening for bowel cancer.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.