The Hollies Surgery Also known as Vida Healthcare

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Patients need were assessed, and care and treatment was delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance supported by clear pathways and tools.

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.

Staff told us they prioritised patients who were clinically vulnerable to ensure their needs were assessed and any immediate care and treatment was delivered. This included those patients who may be homeless. Staff told us, and we saw evidence in clinical records, of clear documentation to support clinicians’ decision making. Patients were made aware of seeking further help if their condition deteriorated.

Feedback we received from care home representatives were positive about their experience on behalf of their residents in respect of assessing the needs of the patients. The practice provided routine assessments as well as those for acute need. We received positive feedback from patients in respect of their experiences with the clinical teams meeting their needs.

We saw the practice had developed staff and a system to ensure that the needs of patients who may be vulnerable were fully assessed in a timely manner. Staff had contact with the patient and their carers to ensure they had access to any support they may benefit from. For example staff would carry out assessments for patients who were concerned about their memory or continence and where appropriate make referrals including to the GP, social services and other healthcare professionals.

The practice identified patients and undertook a full assessment of their physical, mental and social needs. There was a system for vaccinating patients with an underlying medical condition according to the recommended schedule. Flu, shingles, pneumonia and meningitis vaccinations were offered to relevant patients. End of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of those whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The practice demonstrated that they had a system to identify people who misused substances, assessed and monitored the physical health of people with mental illness, severe mental illness, and personality disorder. Patients with poor mental health, including dementia, were referred to appropriate services. GPs followed up patients who had received treatment in hospital or through out of hours services. We saw evidence the practice undertook audits of all patients who attended A+E. The practice could demonstrate how they identified patients with commonly undiagnosed conditions, for example diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), atrial fibrillation and hypertension.

We received direct feedback from patients and reviewed comments on the NHS UK web site Comments included a patient being provided with a flexible approach to attend regular reviews for their condition and referral to secondary care being made in a timely manner.

Staff told us that the leaders provided opportunities for them to keep up to date with the current guidelines and changes to evidence-based care and treatment. Staff told us they were able to attend meetings to discuss cases and new guidelines, and minutes of the meetings were available should they need.

We did not receive specific examples from patients about how teams, staff and services worked together. However, we did receive feedback stating that the whole practice team delivered a positive experience.

Staff told us they were proud of the cohesive team working relationships they had to ensure all patients received high quality healthcare. They told us they were engaged with the leaders to be innovative and meet their patient’s needs. For example, the practice-led community services team who ensured that patients were supported and referred to the appropriate support service or health care professional.

Staff had all the information they needed to deliver safe care and treatment. There were clear policies and procedures in place, and these were easily available for staff to use. There were systems for sharing information with staff and other agencies to enable them to deliver safe care and treatment. Referrals to specialist services were documented, contained the required information and there was a system to monitor delays in referrals. Staff regularly liaised with community teams such as community nurses, health visitors and mental health practitioners.

Staff told us they promoted and encouraged living healthier lives. They recognised that areas of their performance such as cervical cancer screening and children’s immunisations were lower than the national targets. The staff told us they were proactive in identifying the patients concerned and where appropriate contacted them to encourage attendance at appointments. They told us they were flexible with their appointment times to ensure every contact counted. The practice encouraged patients in other lifestyle choices such as supporting those who wanted to stop smoking and those who need help and support to manage health eating. The innovative group work with patients with diabetes had shown successful results with patients undertaking and managing the disease better including many losing weight.

Feedback from a patient was positive about how the practice staff had supported and motivated them during a difficult time.

Patients had access to appropriate health assessments and checks including NHS checks for patients aged 40 to 74. There was appropriate and timely follow-up on the outcome of health assessments and checks where abnormalities or risk factors were identified. All patients with a learning disability were offered an annual health check. Patients with long-term conditions were offered an effective annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. The practice had a proactive approach to supporting or referring patients to discuss and manage healthy lifestyle choices. They offered patients with diabetes an opportunity to engage with a practice patient group session to promote healthy lifestyle choices including weight management.

The practice had a comprehensive programme of quality improvement activity and reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of care provided. The practice recognised that the data indicated that they were performing lower than the national targets for some baby immunisations. The practice had undertaken a detailed audit to ensure they were aware and had the up-to-date information. The staff liaised with other health professionals such as community nurses, health visitors and school nurses as needed. The practice also recognised the lower figures for their cervical screening performance. Clinical staff were proactive to encourage patients to attend their appointments including screening appointments and offered flexible booking of appointments.

Although we did not receive many specific examples from patients regarding monitoring and improving outcomes we did have direct feedback from a patient who described being provided with a flexible approach to attend regular reviews for their condition.

Feedback received from staff and leaders was positive about monitoring and improving outcomes. The practice demonstrated a revised recall system for patients to ensure appropriate and timely monitoring. Staff told us the new system in place enabled them to ensure every contact counted and reduced the number of times patients needed to attend the practice. They told us this more cohesive approach to monitoring patients had improved outcomes for patients.

Staff told us they always obtained consent from patients or if appropriate their guardian and offered a chaperone where appropriate. This was recorded on the clinical system. They told us for some procedures written consent was discussed with and obtained from the patient.

The practice always obtained consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance. Clinicians understood these requirements when considering consent and decision making. We saw that consent including written consent for some procedures was documented. Clinicians supported patients to make decisions, and where appropriate, they assessed and recorded a patient’s mental capacity to make a decision. Do Not Attempt Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions were made in line with relevant legislation and were appropriate. We saw the process to ensure decisions were held with the patient, relatives and carers. There was a process in place to ensure DNACPR forms were reviewed when the patient’s condition or circumstances changed.

We did not receive any concerns from patients we had feedback from or who we spoke with regarding consent. Care home representatives were positive in their feedback. They told us staff always spoke with the patient, relatives and carers and obtained informed consent taking into account the patients’ choices and decisions.