The Manor Clinic

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

The responsive key question remains rated as good. One quality statement, Equity in Access, was included in this assessment. No breaches of regulation were identified. The practice 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 practice identified and allocated resources as required to improve inequalities and support 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.

GP appointments were available from 8am till 8pm every weekday including improved access appointments. Patient appointments were available either online, face to face, by telephone, or as a home visit. Named GP appointments are available to patients. There were established and effective processes in place to monitor and respond to changes in patient demand for services and clinical risks. Text and telephone call reminders were sent to patients to reduce non-attendance rates and arrangements were in place for prioritising patients using a triage tool overseen by a clinician. Patients benefit from access to a multidisciplinary team but may also be referred to external specialists such as, first contact physiotherapist, podiatrist, advanced nurse practitioner, social prescriber.

The practice understood the needs of its local population and had developed services in response to those needs. The practice told us they reviewed Patient experiences obtained through quantitative and qualitative data, such as the GP patient survey, EConsult, Friends and Family, complaints and via informal feedback from patients and staff. Patients could access appointments by phone, online and by visiting the practice. The practice told us they monitored demand on their call system and EConsult, increasing staffing at the busiest times. They reviewed abandoned call rates, non-attendance rates by patients and monitor attendance of their patients at out of hours services and accident and emergency services, to ensure they were prioritising the clinical needs of patients appropriately. Patients who had a request for an emergency appointment were seen the same day. The practice website provided information for patients regarding how to book an appointment. The range of options included by telephone, by visiting the practice, by using the online consultation service and the on-line appointment system. The practice also made use of a text message service to send and receive information from patients and an online software system to communicate with patients. Practice staff receive awareness training in supporting people with learning disabilities, autism, dementia and care navigation. To support patients to access the right support in a timely manner. Feedback from staff demonstrated people in vulnerable circumstances were able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode.

The GP patient survey data from 1 January to 31 March 2023 regarding access indicators found the practice was below local and/or national averages for patient experience. This data was obtained from 1% of their patient population. Improvements were required for all 4 indicators. These included, how easy it was to get through to someone at their GP practice on the phone, being satisfied with their GP practice appointment times, those who responded positively to the overall experience of making an appointment and those satisfied with the appointment offered. The practice has addressed these findings and do not believe they are representative of patient’s current experience. Data from their EConsult system showed patients reported positive experiences of using the system. Whilst their Friends and Family data 95% of respondents report a positive experience.

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.