Holyhead Primary Healthcare 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 carried out an announced assessment of all 5 quality statements under the caring key question. We found patients were treated with kindness, empathy and compassion. Staff understood that the patient experience was important and how patients are treated and supported matters. Patient’s privacy and dignity was respected. Every effort was made to take their wishes into account and respect their choices, to achieve the best possible outcomes for them. This included supporting people to live as independently as possible. Staff talked passionately about caring for patients, providing high quality services and putting patient’s needs first. We noticed that staff seemed to know their patients well and could talk about their individual needs and circumstances without needing to refer to their medical records.

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.

Patients we spoke to said they were treated with kindness and compassion and felt supported by practice staff. Patient responses in the 2024 National GP patient survey to the question “how good was the healthcare professional at treating you with care and concern?” showed that 89% of people responding to the survey felt they were good, slightly higher than the national average of 85%. Of those people completing the survey, 84% of people found the reception and administrative staff to be helpful (the national average was 85%). The latest available Friends and Family Test results the practice shared with us for the month of July 2024 showed 82% of the 41 people who responded described their experience as good.

Staff were passionate about providing high quality patient-centred services and shared examples where they had gone the extra mile to support patient’s overall health and wellbeing. Leaders collected feedback from patients in a variety of ways, including a continuous in-house survey which had captured 984 responses between April and September 2024. Leaders used this patient feedback to benchmark their performance year on year and inform future service developments. Staff told us that chaperones of all genders were available if needed. All the staff we spoke to who functioned as a chaperone told us they had appropriate training and were able to describe the role and responsibilities, including recording it on the patient’s records. Leaders monitored trends in complaints and compared themes to previous years. They had an annual meeting where these themes were discussed and actions planned to address them.

All staff we spoke with during the assessment showed a caring attitude towards patients and wanted to provide a high quality of care. Staff communicated with patients in a way that helped them to understand their care, treatment, condition and any advice given. There were arrangements to ensure confidentiality at reception and a private room was available if patients were distressed or wanted to discuss sensitive issues. Staff were happy to go the extra mile to support patients for example one receptionist described how he had shown patients how to change the language on their smart phone so that the practice website showed booking information in the correct language. During our on-site visit to the practice, we observed several patients attending clinic appointments and group education sessions; staff were welcoming, kind and friendly towards patients attending the practice that day. We saw that notice boards at the practice provided a wealth of information about the practice itself and community services and support groups. The practice website also provided patients with information on services available to them both at the practice and locally. Staff displayed understanding and a non-judgemental attitude towards patients. We observed a culture of kindness and respect between colleagues.

Patients were treated with respect and dignity and supported to manage their health in a way that made sense to them. Comments made by patients we spoke to suggested that staff took account of their individual circumstances during consultations. In the 2024 national GP patient survey, of the patients answering the question “were you involved as much as you wanted to be in decisions about your care and treatment?” 85% said yes, this is slightly below the national average of 91%.

Staff explained how they assessed, understood and recorded patient’s needs and preferences to make sure their care and treatment was individualised and tailored to their circumstances. Staff used alerts on the clinical systems to make sure they were aware of any protected characteristics that required reasonable adjustments or any communication needs patients had. To accommodate these needs staff had access to interpreters (or were multilingual themselves), extended appointments, and chaperones to make sure patients understood their care and felt comfortable during examinations. Reception staff explained that patients who were neurodiverse or had a learning disability did not have to wait in a busy waiting room and could be shown straight through to the clinic room.

Our record reviews indicated that patient’s individual needs and preferences were understood and these were reflected in their care, treatment and support. Care plans were formed with patients and information was communicated in a way they could understand. People’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs were understood and met. There were processes in place that allowed staff to identify and record patient’s preferences on their patient record. Social prescribers provided holistic support services such as workshops for carers and worked with external providers to provide support for housing, domestic violence survivors and patients with problem gaming or gambling habits. The practice was also an accredited veteran friendly practice. Staff had been given training on equality and diversity as well as autism and learning disabilities.

Patients reported that they could access a variety of types and times of appointments. In the 2024 National GP patient survey 72% of patients responded that they were offered a choice of day when booking an appointment, this was above the national average of 53%. When attending that appointment 92% of patients reported having trust and confidence in the healthcare professional they saw, which was the same as the national average. Forty-seven per cent of patients had used the practice website or NHS app to book an appointment in the last 12 months, this was above the national average of 41%.

Staff understood the importance for patients of having choice and control over their care and treatment and collaborated with patients to achieve this. Several staff told us about opportunistic patient education done during consultations which then led to active patient participation such as attending smoking cessation clinics. The practice nurses, due to working part-time covering 3 days of the week offered flexible extra or alternative clinics on other days or different times to accommodate workers and parents who may need appointments out of work hours. Staff offered information to patients about all the treatments available to them, to enable patients to make informed choices about their care.

The practice offered appointments with a range of different healthcare professionals so patients could access the most suitable care for their condition. Face to face, telephone or video call appointments were offered. Extended opening hours were available once a week to 8pm and on Saturdays. Patients were supported to have choice and control over their own care and make decisions about their care, treatment and well-being. Referrals were made to services to support improved health and general well-being, for example smoking cessation and weight loss services. Patient information leaflets and notices were available in the patient waiting area which told patients how to access support groups and organisations.

Patients we spoke to felt their needs had been met by the practice. Feedback from a representative of the patient participation groups (PPG) / patient education groups (PEG) was that the practice listened to and engaged with them. We looked at reviews of the practice left on various websites in the last 12 months. There were 3 reviews on the Birmingham Health Watch website with an overall star rating of 3 stars; of which one is 3 star and two are 5 stars. There were no reviews on the NHS website from the last 12 months. Positive comments from people we spoke to included staff listening, being thorough and offering helpful advice.

People’s needs, views, wishes and comfort were a priority. Staff had access to appropriate information and were able to anticipate additional needs to avoid any preventable discomfort, concern or distress. Staff took time to observe, communicate and engage people in discussions about their immediate needs and how to respond in the most appropriate way. All staff were trained to recognise when people needed urgent help or support and use appropriate tools and technology to assist them. As well as the clinical staff, reception staff were trained in recognising sepsis and signposting patients accordingly.

Leaders explained to us that they had encouraged an open-door policy since they took over the practice in 2023 and that staff were encouraged to contribute to monthly whole staff clinical governance meetings. We found staff to be dedicated and enthusiastic about their roles with a genuine desire to put patients at the centre of their work. Staff told us they had access to the equipment, training and support they needed to be confident in their job. Some staff described how they had been supported to extend their skills, for example starting a nursing apprenticeship. All the staff we spoke to said they felt confident to speak up to the leadership team if something went wrong or they had concerns and they felt they would be heard. More than one member of staff described the practice team as like a family. The practice manager told us they provided private space for staff to pray during religious festivals.

There were mostly sufficient staff to provide services without staff having excessive workloads. Due to recruitment difficulties, qualified nursing hours were limited. We saw that administrative processes such as referrals were completed within recommended time frames without undue delays. Staff who had extra responsibilities such as the IPC lead were given time away from their clinical duties in which to complete this work, for example the healthcare assistants had one day a week to do non-patient facing work. There were regular in-house meetings as well as multidisciplinary meetings with community teams. Leaders regularly attended PCN and ICB meetings to share learning, best practice and innovations across the patch. Staff had access to occupational health services which included a counselling service. The leadership team had implemented a monthly staff champion award which had been a popular development with staff. This recognised the achievements and hard work of a particular staff member each month and was presented during the clinical governance meeting.