Hendford Lodge Medical 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 assessed all quality statements in the caring key question.

At our last assessment, we did not assess the caring key question and a rating of good was carried forward from previous inspection. Following this assessment, the rating remained good. The service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

Results from the national GP Patient Survey showed that 54% of people responded positively to the overall experience of their GP practice. A total of 75.1% of people said that during their last appointment, the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at listening to them. A total of 76% of people said that during their last appointment, the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern. A total of 83.3% of people said that during their last appointment, they had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to. All the indicators were below national averages. However, since our last inspection, we have received feedback from 59 people about the practice. There were 39 positive responses about their experience, with the majority commenting that the staff were helpful, listened to their concerns and treated them with kindness and respect. The rest of the responses were mainly about the difficulty in booking appointments and poor access by phone. Some people added that once they got an appointment, they received good care from helpful staff. The majority of the feedback collected by Somerset Healthwatch also showed that people received good care from kind and compassionate staff.

We observed staff to be friendly and helpful with patients at the reception desk and on the telephone during our site visit. Conversations at the front desk could not be overheard when in the reception area. Arrangements were in place to promote patients’ privacy. For example, consultations were held in private with doors closed and there were areas in consulting rooms that could be curtained off to promote privacy.

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

Results from the national GP Patient Survey showed that 85.8% of people said that during their last appointment, they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. This was in line with the national average.

Staff understood and respected the personal, cultural, social and religious needs of patients. Staff treated patients as individuals and were able to describe adjustments they made to support them. They documented patients’ communication needs in their clinical records and ensured their needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. People’s wishes were recorded on their care records. There was a process to share electronic care records with other local health and care professionals where required. The practice carried out its own patient survey, monitored for themes and took actions depending on the nature of the concern.

The practice supported patients to have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing, and promote their independence.

Staff told us that they empowered patients to be involved in their care and treatment. For example, the nurses who specialised in the management of leg wounds taught their patients about their care and treatment needs to promote healing. This helped patients feel more confident and able to actively take care of their leg wounds.

People could access information in the practice such as posters and leaflets and on the practice’s website to support them to make healthier choices.

The service understood and responded quickly to people’s immediate needs.

Some people experienced difficulties when trying to access appointments. However, we received feedback from patients and a representative of PPG that access had improved in recent months. This was achieved as the practice had reviewed their phone and appointment system and recruited additional GPs. Further details can be found under the equity in access quality statement in the responsive key question.

Leaders had reviewed staffing to ensure there were enough clinicians to meet the needs of patients. There was a system for appointment triage that ensured people with immediate needs had access to services. During the site visit, we saw that on-the-day appointments were available for patients with urgent needs. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support and staff were able to give relevant examples.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff.

Staff we spoke with were happy to work at the practice. Staff felt well supported by leaders and could approach them at any time for advice and guidance. Staff could raise concerns about their wellbeing during annual appraisals or regular team meetings. The practice supported the staff in professional development and career progression.

The practice offered staff flexible or reduced working hours to support work-life balance, especially when needed due to personal circumstances.The practice conducted a staff survey which included questions relating to their wellbeing and identified areas for improvement. Changes were made in response to the staff feedback. For example, team building event was organised and a snack shop was set up at the practice to encourage staff taking breaks. The practice met up with the other practices locally to discuss the findings and share experiences of good practice as part of the quality improvement project on staff wellbeing.