Wood Lane 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

- The GP Patient Survey results for 2023 revealed patients experience of accessing services at the practice, were lower than local and national averages. - The practice did not conduct its own internal patient surveys. - Comments left for the practice on nhs.co.uk showed that patients were very happy with services provided.

This service scored 71 (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.

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

We reviewed comments left on the NHS choices website for the 12 months prior to our inspection and saw that most patients who had left comments were very happy with services at the practice. Data and comments from the NHS Friends and Family Test (FFT) gathered by the practice between February 2023 and January 2024 revealed that from 42 responses, 33 responses noted their experience at the practice meant they were unlikely to recommend the practice. In the 2023 National GP Patient Survey, the practice’s data demonstrated responses to patient satisfaction with GP practice appointment times, how easy it is to get through to the practice by phone, satisfaction with the appointment offered, and with the overall experience of making an appointment were below the national and local averages. These were similar in performance to previous year’s results. From the 18 questions posed which comprised the survey, the practice scored equal to or above the national average for 8 of the questions. As part of our assessment, we spoke with members of the practice patient participation group (PPG) who told us that practice leaders and staff listened to and acted on concerns raised by the PPG in a timely manner.

The practice had not undertaken its own internal in-depth satisfaction patient surveys (with the exception of FFT), but told us that they acted on feedback received. This included increasing staffing at busiest times and increasing the number of face-to-face appointments. The provider had identified that the current telephone system was not able to deliver functions such as call back functions and preventing call drop of service users waiting on the telephone. The provider told us that they had committed to upgrading the existing telephone system but no time scale for this upgrade was given to the inspection team.

We saw examples where the provider used data to improve services provided. These included a review of advice given by care navigators to patients and a review of demand versus capacity. These reviews enabled the provider to allocate further resources (where required) to address patient requirements.

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.