Spinney Hill 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.

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

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. We saw relatives being included in discussions where patients did not have capacity. We saw evidence of people with additional communication needs being supported in a way that suited them. Patients with learning disabilities had regular physical and mental health checks.

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.

The practice clinicians told us their core aim was to tackle inequality within the community and so had set up evening and weekend clinics to offer NHS Health checks to patients to encourage attendance at the practice. We saw the practice worked in partnership with other services to meet the needs of its patient population. We saw examples of the practice working with other services to educate and upskill the community in healthcare education and what services were best suited for particular health concerns. The practice also worked with other external services to try to reach hard to reach populations to encourage them to attend community pharmacies for health checks which may indicate they need further health investigations. 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. Practice staff were passionate about supporting all community groups which was planned to be further supported by the PPG in the future. The practice was also engaged with Public Health via the PCN to encourage primary prevention of chronic conditions.

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

Information to promote the take up of screening and immunisation programmes was available in a range of languages. Practice staff also were able to discuss concerns around screening and immunisation in patients own language either through practice staff being able to speak multiple languages, or translation services when required. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. Patients were informed as to how to access their care records. We saw information being provided to patients via leaflets for conditions. Where leaflets were not available, staff told us they were able to write down important information if patients required written support.

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. We received feedback from patients directly to the CQC as part of our inspection which included many positive comments from patients regarding how they felt listened to by staff and clinicians at the practice. The National GP Patient Survey found that the practice scored higher than national average as treating patients with care and concern.

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

In response to the National GP Patient Survey data and from feedback from members of the community the provider had completed an access action plan. This included changing the process for obtaining appointments which included triaging patients, communicating results to patients differently, recruiting additional staff and utilising PCN appointments. The practice could demonstrate that after these changes, there was a 10% increase in appointments each week. Patients could also attend some appointments on weekends, including home visits if necessary. The practice reviewed appointments weekly and planned to complete the access action plan annually to ensure access continued to improve for patients. People could access the service to suit their needs for example online, in person and by telephone. Treatment rooms were available on the ground floor and a ramp and automatic door had been fitted to the entrance. There were also consultation rooms on the first floor, which patients could access via lift.

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 generally positive. 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. 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. 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.