Porters Avenue Doctors Surgery

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.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as requires improvement as results from the National GP patient survey showed that patient levels of satisfaction with the way they were treated regarding listening, care and concern, confidence and trust were significantly lower than national and local averages. At this assessment, we changed the rating to good as results from the survey had shown an increased level of patient satisfaction, although it remains below national and local averages. We also considered efforts to improve satisfaction levels, evidence through practice in-house surveys and patients we spoke to during the assessment.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

During our inspection in August 2023, results from the National GP Patient Survey showed patient levels of satisfaction with the way they were treated regarding listening, care and concern, confidence and trust was significantly lower than local and national averages. At the time, results showed that 65% of respondents to the survey stated the healthcare professional was good at listening to them during their last appointment; this has increased to 70%. At the last inspection, results from the survey showed that 67% of respondents stated the healthcare professional they saw treated them with care and concern; this increased to 75%. Whilst the percentage of patients who responded positively had increased, results were still lower than local and national averages. During the last inspection, 42% of patients responded positively to the overall experience of their GP practice; this increased to 58% although was lower than the local average of 70% and national average of 75%.

The service considered the response rate from the 2025 National GP Patient Survey to be an unreliable reflection of patient experience, as only 94 surveys were returned from an estimated practice population of approximately 22,000 patients.

The service recognised scores were lower than local and national averages and worked through an action plan to increase patient satisfaction levels. This included MDU customer training for clinicians, in-house training for non-clinical staff, requesting feedback from every patient and in-house surveys with similar questions to those from the National GP Patient Survey.

Results from the service’s in-house survey showed increased patient satisfaction levels. The survey was carried out between October to November 2025, which showed 80% of patients found reception staff helpful, 82% of patients reported a positive experience with staff, and 84% of patients felt listened to and understood during their last appointment.

On the date of the site visit, we spoke to patients waiting in the reception area to ask about how they felt they were treated by staff at the service. We spoke to five patients who spoke positively about the service they received from staff.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.

Patients’ personal, cultural, social, religious and equality characteristics needs were understood and met. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care, such as the requirement of translators for appointments.

The service promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Staff helped patients and their carers to access advocacy and community-based services. Staff were able to refer patients to the service’s social prescriber, who assisted patients with issues such as finance and housing.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support, including mental health crisis teams and access to services such as Talking Therapies.

The service utilised the local social prescribing team supported by the Primary Care Network. Patients we spoke with during the assessment told us their needs had been met by the service.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included the necessary resources and facilities for safe working, such as regular breaks and rest areas. We saw team building days were established within the practice and the service supported staff to develop into new roles. For instance, the service shared examples of internal promotion within the organisation.