Abbeywell Surgery Also known as Abbey Mead Surgery, Romsey

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

Leaders understood the challenges to patient access and services were being designed to make them accessible and timely for people who were most likely to have difficulty accessing care or advice from clinicians or appropriate healthcare professionals. 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.

Feedback from the National GP patient survey results demonstrated that 84% of patients say the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to was good at listening to them during their last general practice appointment. In addition, 91% were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment during their last general practice appointment.

Leaders told us that complaints were regularly reviewed and discussed in practice meetings to share learning. The practice had received 14 complaints in the last 12 months and there was evidence that appropriate action was taken and patients were responded to in a timely fashion.

The practice had a complaints policy. We saw complaints were used to improve the quality of care. There were regular practice meetings where complaints and significant events were discussed to share learning and make improvements. Information about how to complain was readily available and patients could make a complaint in person, or via the practice website.

Patients could book appointments by telephone, online, and in person by visiting the practice. Appointments were available face to face, by telephone, or as a home visit. Same day appointments were available, and patients could book routine appointments up to 2 weeks in advance. Appointments with a GP were available throughout the week. The practice offered appointments from a variety of additional clinical staff for example nurses, health care assistant and pharmacist from the primary care network (PCN).

The practice were responding to the needs of their population and were developing 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 complaints and via informal feedback from patients. All non-clinical staff were trained in care navigation.

Patients could access appointments by phone, online and by visiting the practice. The practice used a sign-posting triage system where reception staff would ask the patient for enough information to make a decision regarding which clinician was appropriate for them to see. Patients were given the option of a face to face or telephone appointment. Patients who requested an emergency appointment were seen the same day. The practice website provided information for patients regarding how to book an appointment.

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.