The Practice Lincoln Green

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 carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, under the key question Responsive and found: The practice had organised services to meet patients’ needs. The practice used people’s feedback and other evidence to actively seek and improve access for people. Services were designed to make them accessible and timely for people including those most likely to have difficulty accessing care. The provider prioritised, allocated resources and developed opportunities as needed to tackle inequalities and achieve equity of access. The practice monitored, reviewed and analysed data and feedback related to patient’s experiences when accessing care at the service. Where negative feedback was received or opportunities to improve were identified, the practice responded with plans implemented and changes designed to improve access, patients’ experiences, and satisfaction levels. Systems implemented were evaluated for effectiveness.

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.

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 in line with the national and local averages. These were similar in performance or had deteriorated from previous year’s results. They told us how they reviewed results and implemented action plans for improvement, for example staff training in care navigation and delivery of an increased number of appointments and different types of appointments. Patient feedback gathered by the practice was less positive. For example, 74.5% of respondents to the Friends and Family Test (FFT) between September and December 2023 said their overall experience of the practice was good or very good. England average was 91%. The practice told us they reviewed feedback from the FFT quarterly and expected to see an improvement in performance due to changes made in the more recent reviews. Adaptations were made for those whose first language was not English and for patients who had information and communication needs related to a disability, impairment or sensory loss. The practice was accessible to patients with a disability, reduced mobility, baby and mothers and those who were hard of hearing. We found the leaders had gathered patient feedback by a variety of methods, responded to it and were continuously making improvements.

Leaders demonstrated they were aware of the challenges to patient access and acted to improve. They implemented initiatives and plans in response to patient surveys and to patient feedback relating to access. We were told how these changes were assessed to make sure patients were not disadvantaged and how the impact of the changes was being monitored. Leaders explained they provided opportunities and support for different groups of the patient population to overcome health inequalities including adjustments to the registration process, and to how patients could communicate with the practice. They demonstrated people in vulnerable circumstances were easily able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode such as homeless people, asylum seekers, and Travellers. We heard about changes they had made including changes to staffing, appointment availability, types of appointments and call handling systems. The practice developed and promoted the use of their website, digital technology and online consultation service to improve access. Feedback and data demonstrated improvements to access had resulted. Traditional methods of access were available to those who were not digitally proficient. We heard about ways that the practice was working with other local stakeholders to improve access to primary care, such as extended access services and Saturday smear taking clinics with the local Primary Care Network (PCN). Improving access and patient experience was a priority. Data and feedback were reviewed. Changes were made to ensure improvements would have a positive impact for their patients.

Patients could book appointments by telephone, online, through an App. and in person at the practice. Information regarding access was displayed in the practice, on social media and online. Appointments were available face to face, by telephone, online, by the App or as a home visit. Same day and pre bookable appointments were available. Weekday evenings and at the weekend appointments were available through an extended access arrangement with other local GP practices in the network. The practice had arrangements in place for prioritising patients. Staff were trained and supported by documented protocols to book appointments with members of the practice clinical team or signpost patients to other appropriate services. The practice offered appointments from a variety of clinical staff for example doctors, advanced nurse practitioners, practice nurse, healthcare assistants. They also offered appointments with advanced role clinicians through the PCN such as physician associates, physiotherapists, pharmacists and a social prescriber. Information on how to access care out of normal GP hours was available on the telephone message system, online and at the practice. We saw evidence that the number of available clinician appointments offered each week was adjusted, suitable for the population need and met requirements of the GP contract. The practice demonstrated how feedback from patients was continually monitored. We were shown and told about feedback that was gathered, reviewed and acted upon. We saw improvements made as a result.

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.