Wellington Medical Practice

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

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this assessment, we assessed all of the quality statements from this key question and rated it good. We found that staff were polite and respectful, however some patients had shared concerns relating to poor staff attitude. We observed the environment to be suitable, there were privacy curtains in clinical rooms and trained chaperones were available when required. Staff we spoke with understood and respected the personal, cultural, social and religious needs of patients and had a clear understanding of their patient demographics.

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.

The latest GP National Patient Survey data showed that 70% of respondents stated that health care professionals were good at treating them with care and concern. This was below the local average of 86% and the national average of 85%. The survey also showed that 56% of respondents found the reception and administrative team at this GP practice helpful. This was lower than the local average of 82% and the national average of 83%. Some patients had shared concerns relating to poor staff attitude.

Staff who chaperoned had completed training and were aware of their role and responsibilities when providing this service. They told us if patients attending for reviews were accompanied, they ensured the patient was happy for the other person to remain in the room.

We observed staff interactions with patients and found that staff were polite and respectful. Staff were mindful of being overheard by patients sat in the reception areas. The practice had actioned improvements in the waiting areas to enable distancing between patients at the reception desk and other waiting patients to maintain the patients’ privacy dignity and to respect their confidentiality.

In the most recent national GP patient survey 77% of respondents stated that during their last GP appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment compared to the local and national averages of 91%. The results of the practice’s internal monthly survey over the last year showed that 81% of patients felt involved with their appointment.

Leaders told us their aim was to deliver a high-quality, sustainable, and patient-centred healthcare model tailored to individual patient needs and conditions. Their goal was to empower every team member, ensuring that they met the highest standards of care. Staff told us how they respected the personal, cultural, social, and religious needs of people and had received training in equalities and diversity.

Staff received equality and diversity training as part of their essential training. Results from the National GP Patient Survey showed that the overall experience of the GP practice was lower than local and national averages at 50% compared with the local average of 72% and national average of 74%. This was lower than the results of the practice’s internal monthly survey, which showed that over the year 59% of patients reported to be happy or very happy with the GP practice.

We received no specific feedback from patients regarding their experiences of this quality statement.

Leaders told us that their patient registration form asked patients to inform them about their personal, cultural, social and religious needs and communication and choice requirements. These were electronically coded onto patient records to ensure their needs could be met. Staff told us they discussed with the patients their holistic needs. These included not only medical but also emotional, social, financial concerns and spiritual needs. Staff reported they ensured that care decisions reflected the patient’s values and preferences. With consent staff signposted patients to other tertiary or health and social care professionals.

People’s care records were personalised, and specific needs were recorded. Care records could be shared or accessed via other services, for example by GP Out of Hours Service, if required.

From the information received, we found that some patients experienced difficulty accessing the practice via telephone and in getting an appointment.

Staff had achieved training appropriate to their role. Those with extended roles had completed additional training. Staff were encouraged to achieve their potential, and staff had been promoted to various roles subsequent to their success. Staff told us palliative care patients had access to a direct telephone line to the practice in order that requests could be actioned promptly to support them and their families, such as anticipatory meds and cancer care support.

We received a low number of completed staff questionnaire feedback responses. The respondents reported they did not always feel listened to and not all felt their suggestions or ideas were acted upon or taken up by the leadership team. Staff we spoke with told us their health and wellbeing was considered, promoted, and supported by leaders. Social events were organised and costs for light lunch during training days for example were met by the partners. Leaders had recognised the risk associated with lone working. Staff promotions were evident following successful achievements. Staff reported there was some flexibility, where able, to facilitate staff changes in circumstances such as increase and decreases in working hours and shift times. Staff told us the practice operated a zero-tolerance procedure if a patient was aggressive towards them or acted inappropriately. There were systems in place to request assistance in an emergency. Patients received a letter of warning if their behaviour was unacceptable.

Staff management policies and procedures were stored electronically and accessible to all staff. Relevant policies were summarised and provided to all staff in the Employee Handbook. Team meetings were held monthly to update staff and provide the opportunity for staff discussions. Staff had access to a wellbeing service.