Brierley Park Medical Group

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

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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. Our review of clinical records showed people were mostly supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care.

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.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs within their practice population. One of the GP partners worked closely with the Patient Participation Group to deliver an annual patient information evening to provide information on people’s emerging concerns. For example, fibromyalgia, men’s health and hormone replacement therapy. The service had access to interpreter services and a hearing loop.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Details of how to complain were clearly displayed within the practice. The service involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. There was a You Said..We Did.. display board within the reception area to keep people up to date with any changes made in response to feedback. Feedback from representatives of 3 care homes, where the service provided care and treatment, was overwhelming positive about how the GPs listened to them during the weekly ward rounds. 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 feedback from people, including complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. The practice offered a range of appointment types to suit different needs for example, face to face, telephone, online. Pre-bookable appointments and on the day appointments were available. Indicators from the latest National GP Patient Survey showed that 74% of respondents were positive about their overall experience of contacting the practice. This was comparable with the national average of 67%. It showed that 55% of respondents were positive about how easy it was to contact their GP practice on the phone. This was comparable to the national average of 50%. In response to these findings, the service had identified changes to improve access to the service. For example, they had updated their telephone system to support call back calls, provided online consultations through their website and increased the availability of pre-bookable appointments online, predominantly for specific clinics. Treatment rooms were available on the ground and first floors at the main practice and a lift was available to take people to the first floor. People that used wheelchairs or had mobility problems were offered an appointment at the main practice as the branch practice was not suitable for this group of people.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Feedback provided by the Patient Participation Group was 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. For example, supporting Park Runs through attending and running sessions. They also worked with the local Primary Care Network 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 such as homeless people and Travellers.

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 review of people’s care records showed that 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. For example, the out of hours services and other health care professionals involved in the care of this group of people.