Bewdley 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

People’s immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. Where appropriate this included their clinical needs and their mental and physical wellbeing. People were involved in the assessment of their needs, and care and treatment was delivered in line with current legislation and evidence-based guidance.

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.

The evidence we reviewed did not show any concerns about people’s experience regarding assessing needs at this practice.

Staff received training in where to direct patients for different health conditions and knew how to prioritise patients who report symptoms that may be clinical emergencies. We were informed patients were told when they needed to seek further help and what to do if their condition deteriorated.

The practice had systems and processes in place to ensure patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. People’s care needs were routinely reviewed. We saw no evidence of discrimination when staff made care and treatment decisions.

The evidence we reviewed did not show any concerns about people’s experience regarding delivering evidence-based care and treatment at this practice.

Staff and leaders told us they had systems and processes in place to keep clinicians up to date with current evidence-based practice. We saw evidence of monthly clinical meetings and supervisions to share guidelines and discuss cases.

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

The evidence we reviewed did not show any concerns about people’s experience regarding how staff, teams and services work together at this practice.

Leaders gave examples of how they worked effectively across teams and services to support people. This included signposting or referring people to other organisations such as the hospital when required.

Feedback from the ICB demonstrated they were satisfied with how staff worked with them to support patients.

The practice worked effectively across teams and services to support people. The practice held regular meetings and shared information between teams and services to ensure continuity of care, for example when clinical tasks were delegated.

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.

The evidence we reviewed did not show any concerns about people’s experience regarding monitoring and improving outcomes at this practice.

Staff and leaders told us the practice routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it.

The practice had a comprehensive programme of quality improvement and used information about care and treatment to make improvements.

The service made improvements using clinical audits which had positive impact on quality of care and outcomes for patients. We reviewed 2 audits relating to asthma patients who had been identified as high users of salbutamol. Salbutamol is a medication that opens the airways in the lungs. This audit had been repeated twice and we saw evidence of improvement. Following the first audit they introduced a protocol and asthma care co-ordinator to proactively arrange reviews and run searches to identify those patients who had been admitted due to their asthma.

The evidence we reviewed did not show any concerns about people’s experience regarding consent to care and treatment at this practice.

Staff understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making. They told us they supported patients to make decisions.

During our checks we found Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders were fully documented, made in line with relevant legislation and were appropriate.