Archived: OHP-Church Stretton 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 carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, under the key question Responsive and found: The leaders used people’s feedback and other evidence to actively seek to improve access for people. Services were designed to make them accessible and timely for people who were most likely to have difficulty accessing care. The provider prioritised, allocated resources and opportunities as needed to tackle inequalities and achieve equity of access.

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.

Patient appointments were available either online, face to face, telephone, or as a home visit. Patients could book appointments by telephone, online and by walking in. Patients could book routine appointments up to 3 weeks in advance and same-day appointments were available. GP appointments were available from 8.30am to 6pm during the weekdays with extended access during the weekend as part of the primary care network. The practice offered appointments from a variety of clinical staff for example the GP’s, nurses, health care assistant, phlebotomist, pharmacist, advanced care practitioner, first contact physio, care coordinator and social prescriber. The practice had arrangements in place for prioritising patients. Staff were trained to book appointments with members of the practice clinical team or signpost patients to other appropriate services and were supported to do this by documented protocols and access to a duty doctor.

The leaders demonstrated they were aware of the challenges to patient access and had acted to improve patient access. In the past 12 months the practice had made improvements to the telephone system and increased the availability of face to face appointments. The leaders promoted the use of their website and online bookable appointments were available for patients to access. Capacity and demand for appointments was kept under review each day with flexibility for additional appointments to be increased to meet the needs of the population. For example, 44% of patients seen during February 2024 was for an urgent appointment. The practice provided opportunities and support for different groups of patient population to overcome health inequalities. For example, we heard how the practice provided support for different groups of patient population including how patients could communicate with the practice and work the practice had completed with a local refuge. We heard about ways that the practice was working with other local stakeholders to improve access to primary care.

The practice understood the needs of its local population and had developed services in response to those needs. The practice told us they obtained feedback from various sources such as the GP patient survey, friends and family and complaints and kept patients up to date on changes. For example, a monthly magazine. All non-clinical staff were trained in care navigation and had strong links with local services for signposting. The practice undertook ongoing audits to determine demand and capacity regarding their appointment system and continued to monitor the availability of appointments and staff regularly. Patients could access appointments by phone, online and by visiting the practice. The practice website provided information for patients regarding how to book an appointment. Patients had access to an interpretation service for patients whom English language was not their first language or had other communication needs. The practice was accessible to patients with mobility needs, with clear signage. The practice was dementia friendly and registered as an armed forces veteran friendly practice. Feedback from staff demonstrated people in vulnerable circumstances were able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode.

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

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.