HMC Health Feltham

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 the patients without discrimination. At our last assessment in 2021 using the old methodology, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

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.

The practice ensured people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and care plans were developed together with the people in response to their changing needs. The care plans at this practice were written by the GPs who considered the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their conditions and involved in planning for their care and involved in the decisions.

The practice understood the health and social care needs of the local community and ensured service delivery was coordinated and responsive to them. The practice introduced different health care professionals such as child mental health nurse, paramedics, diabetes specialist nurse, pharmacists to meet the different needs of the patients and the responses from the patients were positive. The practice had plans to educate the local community on the benefits of cervical screening and child immunisations.

The practice ensured the patient population had access to information that was beneficial to their health. The practice provided access to interpreters, signers (British Sign Language) and the hearing loop. The staff listened to the patients to get information that would assist in providing adequate care and signposted them to the right services where necessary.

The practice responded to patients who complained in an open and transparent manner and the National GP patient survey results showed that the patients were satisfied with how they were listened to (78%) and involved in decisions about their care (86%). Lessons learned from complaints were shared with staff at meetings and minutes circulated to relevant staff. Complaints were managed in line with the policy of the practice, however, the complaints process and policy needed to be reviewed and made clearer for patients to use easily and better documented by the practice.

The practice ensured that the patient population could access the care, support and treatment they needed. The practice had an action plan to improve the phone system with a callback option for patients so that they did not stay on the line for long to help with booking of appointments (the impact was yet to be seen), and patients could also book appointments at the reception desk. There was a disabled access (lift in place as the practice was located on the third floor of the premises), double appointments for higher risk patients or those with disabilities, hearing loop in place and a safe place to speak in the practice. Patient feedback collated by the local HealthWatch showed that many of the patients were satisfied with their experiences at this practice such as getting same day appointments, quick response from the GP, ease of access using online method, kindness of some the doctors and nurses, some reception staff being nice. However, there were areas that needed improvement such as access, waiting times, sharing relevant patient information with specialist services and staff behaviour. Some patients found their appointment rushed and some others found the NHS App not to be user friendly. Patients told us the waiting time for an interpreter was very long.

The National GP Patient Survey data showed that the practice had areas that needed focusing on to improve access. The results showed 61% of respondents easily accessed the practice by phone which was slightly above the national (50%) and local (58%) averages. Results showed 45% of respondents easily accessed the practice using the website which was below the national (48%) and local (52%) averages. Forty-four percent of respondents easily accessed the practice using the NHS App which was below the national (45%) and local (49%) averages. Eighty- eight percent of respondents found the reception and administrative team at the practice helpful which was just slightly above the national (83%) and local (81%) averages. Seventeen percent of respondents saw or spoke to their preferred healthcare professional when they would like to which was significantly below the national (40%) and local (41%) averages. Staff received the right training to ensure equity in access for the patient population.

Staff were trained on equality and diversity, and the patients were known to staff which helped to provide the right information and support to meet their needs. Feedback from patients using the service to The Care Quality Commission (CQC) was positive. Staff were described as very helpful and kind. Priority appointments were available to patients who needed them. Health checks reviews were completed and those eligible were offered and encouraged to attend. Pride in practice training helped the practice to provide support for patients who needed such support.

The practice worked collaboratively with other healthcare providers to support patients with end-of-life care. The patients were added to a high-risk register and the district nurses were very involved. Care records or information were shared through the clinical system. The DNACPR records were reviewed and updated according to the Mental Capacity Act. Care plans were updated according to the changing needs of the patients. The wishes of the patients were respected.