Addison House - Haque Practice Also known as Addison House 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 recognise the pressure that practices are currently working under, and the efforts staff are making to maintain levels of access for their patients. At the same time, our strategy makes a commitment to deliver regulation driven by people’s needs and experiences of care. Although we saw the practice was attempting to improve access, this was not yet reflected in the GP patient survey data or other sources of patient feedback. The shortfalls we identified were dependant on the evidence of impact and must reflect the lived experience that people were reporting at the time of our assessment.

This service scored 68 (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 completed equality and diversity training to ensure their competence. Patients would be included in their care planning to ensure person centred care was given. Peoples wishes and decisions were recorded and consent documented to show agreement. Any legal paperwork to support a person's care plan was placed into the persons medical records, for example, an advanced care plan. Peoples wishes for appointments were documented on their medical records and were accessible for staff who booked appointments. Information was given to people for them to make an informed decision of their care based upon all information available.

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.

Friends and family testing and inhouse patient surveys had been completed in December 2023 and received 368 positive responses from people for confidence and trust in the health professionals. In the May 2024 in house patient survey, this had risen to 422 positive responses. The 2024 national patient survey results showed 76% of people had responded positively to how the practice communicated with them. Although this was below the national and local averages, the provider had seen an increase to the previous year. All other national patient survey data was mixed in patient responses.

The 2024 national GP patient survey had seen a decrease to access via the telephone to 14%. This was significantly lower than the local and national averages. The practice told us they had implemented a call back function and talk to text service to increase telephone access. There had also been a telephone audit completed in January 2024 by an external company in which these recommendations had been implemented. Unratified data by the practice showed patient access for the telephone had remained not very easy in December 2023 and May 2024. The provider would analyse their friends and family feedback on a 6 monthly basis to identify themes and trends. Although the inhouse surveys were showing positive increases, this had not yet been reflected within the national GP patient survey. We look forward to reviewing the next national GP patients survey results.

The practice completed regular in house patient feedback via e-consult, friends and family testing, and patient surveys. Each year the National GP Patient Survey was completed at the practice and the most recent 2024 data showed only 12% of patients found it easy to speak to their preferred clinician on the telephone. We did not see any evidence of how the practice would address this.

The provider had looked at the patient demographics due to being one of the most deprived population areas of the county. There had been health inequalities work within the local primary care network whereby the practice was reviewing poor patient compliance. Other inequality work had focussed on learning disability patient access and a project to tackle low cervical screening uptake. This work was ongoing due to poor patient recall attendances.

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.