Your Health Partnership (YHP) Also known as YHP-Regis Medical Centre

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

We found staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with appropriate advice. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of the service people received and received support from managers to do their job. Training was made available to staff to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to support people. Managers ensured staff had the appropriate knowledge to support people appropriately. Our rating for this key question was good.

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 found people using the service were positive. They felt involved when their needs were being assessed and felt staff understood their individual and cultural needs.

We found that the provider had comprehensive packages of care for people. Where people had disabilities regular health checks were taking place and were documented appropriately and easy read documentation and health passports supported how people were cared for when appropriate. We found the provider worked closely with the local mental health team and had in place social prescribers with a wide ranging scope to support people where needed.

Staff told us that they had systems and processes in place so clinicians could be kept up to date with current evidence-based practice. Staff told us they had regular meetings including clinical training sessions to share evidence based best practice, guidelines and discuss cases.

We completed a series of searches on the provider's clinical records system. These searches were completed with the consent of the provider. The records we reviewed provided evidence that the practice was assessing and delivering care in line with current legislation/standards and evidence-based guidance.

We were told that teams worked closely together for example, the total triage team consisting of advance care practitioners and care navigators overseen by a GP, could signpost to a wide range of services including a local physiotherapy pilot or the social prescribing team. The provider also had a home visiting team who attended local care homes and community hospital beds. The team routinely liaised with other NHS professionals including palliative care, mental health colleagues and pain management teams. Leaders gave examples of how they worked effectively across these teams and services to benefit the care and treatment people received.

The provider held regular meetings and shared information between teams and services to ensure continuity of care. We saw evidence of regular meetings with other health and social care professionals, which help to ensure the quality of care and treatment provided to people. There was a clear process to allow staff to feed into various care pathways.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People told us about activities they were involved in that monitored and supported their health. Many of the people we spoke with told us they had been at this provider for many years due to the quality of care and treatment they received.

We were told about a range of projects/pilots that the provider carried out as a way to monitor and improve outcome for people for example, learning disability project, urgent care team, learning from deaths review, excellence in children asthma and eye care review. These were used as a means to improving the care and treatment people received in a way that allowed the provider to monitor outcomes for people's health care needs.

The provider had a comprehensive range of clinical audits that they used to monitor health outcomes for people. They also used the information gathered through their projects and pilots to help direct how they ensured they offered good outcomes for people.

During our clinical searches, we found processes in place for monitoring people's health. The provider also carried out annual reviews for people with long term conditions and specialists health care needs.

We were told that people's consent was always sought as part of how care and treatment was delivered. People's consent was an integral part of how care and treatment was provided and where people's consent could not be sought, then a next of kin, family member or someone who could make decisions would be sought.

We saw documentation to evidence how people's consent was recorded and documentation showing the expectations of staff when consent was needed.