The Ruddington Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating remains the same. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect and involved as partners in their care.

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.

The service treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect. We observed staff treating people with kindness and respect within the waiting room. Arrangements were in place to promote peoples’ privacy. Staff that chaperoned were aware of their responsibilities in maintaining a person’s dignity and safety during an intimate examination. However, we observed the challenges around maintaining people’s privacy in the reception area due to the layout. National GP Patient Survey data and feedback received from people reflected people felt listened to and were treated with kindness. For example, 85% of respondents stated that during their last appointment, the healthcare professional was very good or fairly good at treating them with care and concern. This was comparable with the national average of 86%. The majority of feedback from people who used the service was positive about how staff treated them. However, a small number commented that not all reception staff were helpful or supportive, and reported isolated incidents when GPs were perceived as dismissive and people felt their concerns were not taken seriously.

The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. National GP Patient Survey data reflected that people felt involved in decisions about their care. For example, 94% of respondents stated that during their last appointment they were involved as much as they wanted to be in decisions about their care and treatment. This was comparable with the national average of 91%. Patient communication needs were met to enable them to be fully involved in their care. The service had identified 211 people registered with the practice as carers which was 2.8% of the practice population. A member of staff had taken on the role of carers’ champion processes were in place to support this group of people.

We did not look at Independence, choice and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Caring.

The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. They used feedback from the National GP Patient Survey, the patient participation group, complaints and comments to respond to people’s needs. The service had introduced a new telephone system and triage system for appointments. The triage system ensured people with immediate needs had access to services when they needed them. Staff we spoke with knew the process for referral to emergency support. Feedback from people who used the service reported positive experiences with prompt responses to appointment requests, often receiving same day appointments through the online system.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care. Staff told us they were valued by leaders. Staff were positive about the support they received from leaders and most staff told us they were listened to and were supported when they required additional support. A team building event was planned for Spring 2025.