Upton 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

We carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, under the key question Responsive and found: Patient feedback from the 2019 to 2023 national GP survey, showed they had made some improvements but had remained consistently below the national average for positive feedback. The practice’s own patient survey in 2023 demonstrated some improvements. The practice had reviewed the feedback and taken action to improve. The practice had implemented an online triage system but had not fully updated the policies to reflect the system. The practice identified and allocated resources as required to improve inequalities and support equity of access. No breaches of regulation were identified.

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.

Leaders told us how it was important for them to understand the needs and health inequalities of their patients to help provide better care. They had completed an audit to review the healthcare needs of their patient population. Actions for the practice to implement from the audit were to implement a culturally sensitive healthcare service, carry out robust chronic disease management programs, provide enhanced mental health services, and comprehensive language support, which the leaders believed would help to improve patient access. The leaders stated the practice met the NHS first contact where patients should be offered an assessment of need, or signposted to an appropriate service, at first contact with the practice. In response to the GP survey the provider submitted action plans for 2022 and 2023. The leaders explained in response to patient feedback they had increased the number of face-to-face appointments by increasing the number of locum and partner GPs, advanced practice nurses and receptionists. In addition, the appointments operated by the primary care network had increase choice for patients. The leaders explained how they worked with the primary care network, the integrated care system, and the integrated care board to enhance patient education, involvement and improve digital platforms. Feedback from staff demonstrated people in vulnerable circumstances were able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode such as homeless people and Travellers. The practice was accessible to wheelchair users. The practice told us clinical and admin staff were completing the Oliver McGowan training in learning disability and autism.

Patients were encouraged to complete a digital form where they could raise their symptoms, concerns, or queries. The online form was available through the website, telephone system and text messages. Where the patients were unable to complete the digital forms or did not have access staff would support them. Forms could be submitted between 8am and 4pm. A member of the triage team would initially review the forms to identify any patients with urgent needs or priority patient who required an urgent appointment. For patients with less urgent needs, the triage team would review the forms to decide which clinician was appropriate for the patient to see and respond within 24 to 72 hours. The triage team had a duty doctor to support them and had commenced completing care navigation training. In addition, the leaders carried out regular audits of the reception calls to ensure patients were offered the appropriate appointments. However, the policies and procedures submitted to CQC by the practice did not fully reflect the system described by staff. The practice was open from 8am to 6:30pm weekdays. GP appointments were available from 9am to 6.30pm on Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday, On a Friday from 9.30am to 6.30pm and on a Wednesday from 8.30am to 6.30pm. The practice also offered appointments with a practice nurse, pharmacists, and a physician’s assistant. The practice also offered appointments from a variety of clinical staff; for example, a pharmacist, a social prescriber, and a paramedic who carried out home visits to review patients with complex needs. The local primary care network operated an enhanced service, which offered appointments on an evening from 6.30pm to 8pm and on a Saturday from 9am to 5pm. The surgery had a cloud-based telephone system that enabled them to monitor telephone calls and waiting times. The surgery submitted data which demonstrated the average call waiting time was 1 minutes and 52 seconds.

We reviewed the GP annual survey patient feedback responses from 2019 to 2023 between 1 January and 31 March. This reviewed patients’ responses to how easy it was to get through to someone at their GP practice on the telephone, the overall experience of making an appointment, and the appointment type and times. This demonstrated the patient feedback results from 2019 to 2023 had made some improvements but had remained consistently below the national average for positive feedback. The provider submitted their friends and family feedback from October 2023 to February 2024 which demonstrated out of 376 patients’ responses approximately 95% of patients surveyed were 'extremely likely' or 'likely' to recommend the practice. The practice had carried out their own patient survey in August 2023, which included questions about access. This found for the waiting time for their call to be answered 47% said they are happy and 19% said they find it fairly easy. However, 18% found it not very easy and 16% not at all easy. For the time they had to wait to get an appointment 61% said great 29% said ok and 10% said poor. In addition, 90% said they found the receptionist very helpful. This feedback demonstrated an improvement on the GP annual survey for 2023. The practice had reviewed and responded to the GP patient feedback and had taken action to improve. For example, in response to the GP survey the provider submitted action plans for 2022 and 2023. We spoke with a member of the patient participation group who was positive about their experience of accessing appointments at the practice. The practice provided access to an interpretation service for patients who did not have English language as a first language or required British Sign Language. The patient record system was used to alert staff to any access requirements the patients required. The leaders explained they had ensured that information in leaflets was clear and available in different languages.

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.