Matching Green 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 assessed 1 quality statement from this key question. We have combined the score for this area with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. We found staff treated people equally and without discrimination. The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

The latest National GP Patient Survey results showed 90% of respondents stated that during their last GP appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decision about their care and treatment. This was in line with the expected national average. The practice shared the latest Friends and Family test data available; this had not been submitted to form part of the national picture but was held locally at the practice. The latest Friends and Family test data shared by the practice demonstrated consistently high for the practice, out of 406 responses 271 were very good and 93 good.

Leaders described how they adjusted services to meet people needs, for example offering longer appointment times for people with mental health condition or learning disability. Staff described how people would be offered adjustments in appointment times to support people, for example offering elderly people appointments in the morning, if they did not like attending later in the afternoon when it was dark. Staff told us homeless people could register with the practice. The practice had identified and coded patients undergoing gender realignment and staff described how they ensured their preferences were recorded on the practice system. Leaders had identified and were working with partnership organisation to ensure their title could be correctly recorded on the system. The practice support people with a learning disability living in supported living accommodation. They described how the practice used interpreting services, adjusted appointments and were flexible to meet their needs. The practice identified people who may be digitally excluded and ensured that information shared with patients by text was also shared with patients by telephone call where required, for example flu campaigns.

There were systems in place to support patients who faced communication barriers to treatment. There was information available for patients to support them to understand how to access services, including on websites and telephone messages. The practice adjusted the length of appointments when needed to meet people's needs. The practice complaints procedure demonstrated that people were listened to and responded to in a timely and effective was to improve the quality of care. The practice had received 4 complaints in the last 12 months. National GP patient survey results were positive, 61.8% of respondents to the survey responded they were able to access appointments found the overall experience of making an appointment positive and were satisfied with appointment times and appointments offered, this was in line with the expected response of 72%.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.