Lathom House Surgery

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

Although the practice performed below the national average in the latest National GP Patient Survey, staff had made significant changes as a result. This included routinely monitoring demand and capacity regarding access arrangements and had established systems to enable the ongoing analysis of appointments and core data and to seek feedback from people to learn more about their experiences.

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.

The data for these indicators highlighted the performance achieved by the practice was below national averages, however a recent survey carried out by the practice based on 843 responses, showed that the response to how easy it was to get through on the phone had increased from 43.9% to 52%. The response to how good was the experience of making an appointment had increased from 48.1% to 51%

Leaders understood the challenges the practice faced in relation to patient access to services and had made several changes to improve services. Staff explained how they worked to support all patient groups and worked to overcome any health inequalities. For example, patients could register at the practice without needing any identification or other documentation.

Appointments could be made by telephone, online, or by visiting the practice in person. Appointments were available on the day, as well as in advance. Evening and weekend appointments were also available. A triage system was used to prioritise patient appointments, where a GP reviewed all appointment requests. Where an alternative service was more appropriate, staff could signpost patients directly to this service.

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.