St John's Medical Centre

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.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Good.

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 service 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.

Care plans reflected physical, mental, emotional, and social needs of patients including those related to protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

In the latest NHS National GP Patient Survey, 87% of respondents said they felt their needs were met during their last appointment (National average 90%). Patients had access to appointments provided by a range of clinicians. The practice listened to patient feedback and took on board any actions.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

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. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare provider. The service provided care for 2 care homes for people with complex needs supported by a dedicated GP for three weekly sessions and an Advanced Clinical Practitioner who conducts regular ward rounds to ensure continuity of care.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The practice had a staff member who could use British sign language (BSL), and 2 hearing loops were available within the practice to support patients with hearing loss, it can provide an interpreter in BSL if required. The service had access to interpreter services if appropriate. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients with learning disabilities had a clear pathway to access the surgery and materials could be offered in an easy read format.

The service 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. We saw complaints were managed in line with the practice’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints. The services National GP survey found 80% of patients said the healthcare professional was good or very good at listening to the patient (national average 87%). The practice had an active Patient Participation Group (PPG), though its diversity did not fully reflect the wider practice population. Group members conducted a small survey and raised concerns about recent NHS England changes, particularly around triage, phone consultations, and online access. They also expressed a desire for greater GP involvement in the group.

The service did not always make sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The practice was open Monday to Friday 08.00 to 18.30, extended access was available weekends and bank holidays and outside core working hours during the week, managed by their Primary Care Network (PCN).

People could access the practice to suit their needs for example online, in person or by telephone. However, the National GP Patient Survey data showed only 27% of people found it easy to contact this GP practice on the phone (national average 53%). As a response to this the practice had identified changes needed to improve and were implementing a call wait time improvement plan. The GP patient survey found 46% of people found it easy to contact the surgery via its website (national average 51%) and that 63% of people rated the helpfulness of reception and administrative teams at the practice fairly helpful or very helpful (National average 83%). Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor, and the surgery had step free access.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Feedback provided by people using the service was mixed. 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. The surgery had held a cancer awareness week and put up a memory board in reception alongside holding a craft afternoon for patients. Staff understood the importance of providing an inclusive approach to care and made adjustments to support equity in people’s experience and outcomes. 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.