Rushden Medical Centre

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 that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. We rated this key question as Good.

This service scored 65 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy within the practice. For example, additional rooms were available if patients needed to talk with reception staff in private; chaperones were available for patient appointments; and privacy curtains were installed in clinical rooms.

The practice engaged in various charity activities regularly including food bank donations and pet food donations. During the site visit, we observed staff being helpful polite and kind to patients.

The National GP Patient Survey data however demonstrated that 50% of respondents felt they were treated with care and concern during their last appointment, which was significantly below the national average of 86%.

We also reviewed data from the NHS ‘Friends and Family Test’ for April, May and June 2026. For the question to patients: ‘With a score of 1 being ‘Poor’ and 5 being ‘Fantastic,’ how would you rate the friendliness and helpfulness of the staff?; April’s survey found 98 patients voted ‘1’; 39 voted ‘2’; 82 voted ‘3’; 78 voted ‘4’; and 66 voted ‘5.’ May’s survey found 10 patients voted ‘1’; 4 patients voted ‘2’; 4 patients voted ‘3’; 5 patients voted ‘4’; and 8 patients voted ‘5.’ June’s survey found 6 patients voted ‘1’; 8 patients voted ‘2’; 12 patients voted ‘3’; 11 patients voted ‘4’; and 9 patients voted ‘5.’

These results demonstrated a gradual improvement and leaders told us they had implemented a number of action points from March 2026 to improve patient experience including Customer Service refresher training with a focus on tone, empathy, accuracy, and de‑escalation; the introduction of a “check understanding” step by staff to ensure patients leave with clear, correct information; weekly staff huddles where staff share positive patient stories and interactions; and a reception ‘quick‑reference guide’ to reduce the occurrence of any conflicting advice communicated by staff to patients.

The practice treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. Personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristic needs were understood and met. Staff had completed equality and diversity training. To accommodate individual needs, patient requirements were recorded on the patient record such as communication needs such as translation and interpretation support, which included British Sign Language, could be organised. For patients that had difficulty using technology, information could be printed on paper if this was preferred.

We discussed with staff how they responded to changes in people’s preferred gender, name and title. Staff explained any changes were patient led and staff dealt with patient preferences effectively and sensitively.

The practice strived to promote people’s independence and supported them to make decisions about their care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff ensured that all necessary information was accessible between services to ensure patient preferences were met to support patient’s independence and outcomes from care and treatment.

In addition, they provided patients with information and guidance to enable them to make informed decisions about their care.

National GP Patient Survey data however showed that 67% of the respondents felt involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last general practice appointment, which was significantly below the national average of 92%. 14% of respondentswere offered a choice of time or day when they last tried to make a general practice appointment, which was significantly below the national average of 57%.

Leaders were aware of the feedback data from patients and had developed an action plan since March 2026 which included addressing clinical communication and continuity; and appointment access.

Staff responded to patients’ needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress. Staff we spoke with knew how to respond when a patient needed urgent attention and knew the processes to follow to ensure emergency support was given. For example, all reception staff had received Care Navigation training and sepsis awareness training. Care Navigation training empowers receptionists to safely guide patients to the most appropriate healthcare professional or service.

There was a system for clinical appointment triage to ensure people with immediate needs had access to services. The Duty GP and the Advanced Nurse Practitioner provided oversight of the triage process and reviewed patient’s queries.

The practice promoted workforce wellbeing to ensure staff felt supported, valued and empowered in their roles. Staff had access to a range of wellbeing resources, including occupational health services, employee assistance programmes and flexible working arrangements where appropriate. Regular one-to-one meetings, team meetings and annual appraisals provided opportunities for staff to discuss their wellbeing, professional development and any concerns.

Training and development opportunities were supported to enable staff to maintain and enhance their skills, and workforce planning arrangements ensured staffing levels were monitored.

The practice fostered an open and inclusive culture where feedback was encouraged and acted upon, and staff reported feeling comfortable raising issues with leaders. Leaders conducted a bi-yearly internal colleague survey where staff satisfaction and suggestions for improvement were reviewed, and action plans were developed.

We were provided with evidence of the latest internal staff survey results which showed 94.8% of staff reported that the health and safety of both staff and patients is taken seriously at Rushden Medical Centre; 89.4% of staff reported they felt their manager is available when needed; and 89.4% of staff also reported they have the appropriate tools to perform at their best at the practice.

As part of our assessment, we asked staff for their feedback about the practice. All of the staff we spoke with during our site visit gave positive feedback and told us they enjoyed working at the practice and there were good relationships amongst colleagues.