Triangle Surgery

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.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

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.

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.

Results from the national GP survey 2025 showed 84% of participants said the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern during their last general practice appointment local 87% and 86% national.

The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language and online translation services. They also had brail signs on clinical room doors.

The practice made adjustments when patients found it difficult to access services. For example, if patients were unable to complete the online triage process in order to book an appointment, practice staff would assist them in booking an appointment.

Due to the lift not working the practice prioritised patients with mobility difficulties, so they could be seen in the consultation room on the ground floor.

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, for example, building relationships with community groups to promote the take up of screening programmes. There were established mechanisms for engaging with the community healthcare provider.

The practice told us patients on the active cancer register were prioritised for same-day appointments where needed. This was reflected in meeting minutes (June 25) where staff were reminded to prioritise at-risk patients for appointments and follow-ups.

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

Data from the GP Patient survey 2025 showed that 57% of patients found it easy to contact the practice using their website. This was in line with the local 58% and national average of 51%.

We saw posters in different languages including (Urdu) displayed around the practice. The practice supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. It also provided information about how to access support for a range of issues.

The PPG feedback that patients appreciated that 4 of the GPs were able to speak Urdu.

The practice had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records.

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.

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 service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The most recent GP Patient Survey data, from April 2025, showed 53% of patients found it easy to get through to this GP practice by phone, which was lower than the local average 61% and in line with the national average of 53%. The practice was aware of the slightly lower score in relation to local averages. We saw an action plan where the practice had reviewed the most recent national patient survey results some of the areas the practice told us they would be working on included: targeted improvements would be made to enhance telephone access, digital communication, and continuity of care. Progress would be monitored quarterly and shared with patients via the practice website and waiting area displays.

In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example, they had extended appointments for people with a learning disability. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone.

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, both to the provider as well as to CQC, was positive. Staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

We saw that all staff (clinical and non-clinical) had completed The Oliver McGowan Mandatory Training on how to support autistic people and people with a learning disability training. They implemented additional support by allotting extra time / double appointment slots with the health care assistant if required. Annual health checks were offered to all patients with a learning disability and autism

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. 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.

The practice told us they prioritise all patients 60 and over for appointment requests so that any urgent requests are seen the same day. They put alerts on patient records who were at high risk, to make staff aware of their needs and to prioritise these patients.

The practice told us they had double the national prevalence of type 2 diabetics and a large proportion of these patients were from the refugee ethnic minority groups, who do not speak English. The practice team speak Urdu, and Spanish, and use language line to optimise patient care.

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.