Hill Top 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 assessed all of the quality statements from this key question. Our rating for this key question is Good. We found the new provider and practice team had completed action plans to improve the service for patients. Improvements were based on the views expressed within the National GP survey results conducted prior to the registration of the new provider. The practice maintained a carer register. The social prescriber was the nominated carers champion who provided advice and direction to staff and patients as required. The practice held a number of policies to support patients being treated as individuals such as respecting religious practices, such as prayer times, dietary restrictions, and observance of religious holidays. Staff reported they used shared decision-making practices to ensure that care decisions reflect the patient’s values and preferences.

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 received no specific feedback from patients regarding their experiences of kindness, compassion and dignity with the practice. Through the NHS UK website 8 reviews under the new provider were 5 star rated. 1 was 2 star and 1 rated 1 star. The positive reviews described the practice staff as caring, excellent, fabulous, fantastic, amazing and great doctors.

Leaders told us they had 609 patients registered as carers and the social prescriber was the nominated carers champion who provided advice and direction to staff and patients as required. Staff told us bereaved patients were sent sympathy cards, were offered regular check-ins and signposted to services for support if required. Clinical staff told us as part of their training they were supported and received training in caring. Staff told us confidentiality clauses were contained within their contract and as part of their on-line training.

We saw reception staff welcomed patients when they attended the practice and were kind and supportive in their approach. Many staff knew the patients well and were on first name terms. Others were supported to make follow up appointments post consultation. Staff actively encouraged patient feedback. If people wanted to speak with a receptionist in private, a room was made available in both buildings. During a tour of the practice, we saw staff respecting patient privacy by knocking on doors to consultation and treatment rooms. Staff were subject to confidentiality clauses contained within their contract as observed on the staff files we sampled.

We received no specific feedback from patients regarding their experiences of how the practice treated them as individuals.

Leaders told us that their patient registration form asked patients to inform them about their personal, cultural, social and religious needs and communication requirements. These were electronically coded onto patient records to ensure their needs could be met. Staff told us they discussed with the patients their holistic needs. These included not only medical but also emotional, social, financial concerns and spiritual needs. Staff reported they used shared decision-making practices to ensure that care decisions reflect the patient’s values and preferences. Staff with consent could signpost patients to other tertiary or health and social care professionals.

The practice held a range of policies to support patients being treated as individuals such as respecting religious practices, such as prayer times, dietary restrictions, and observance of religious holidays.

We received no specific feedback from patients regarding their experiences of how the practice helped them to maintain their independence, choice and control.

Staff told us they supported patients' independence choice and control by ensuring patients were central to their care and treatment decision making. Face to face two-way discussions took place for any treatment options and the patients provided opportunity to voice their views. The staff we spoke with advised that patients ultimately with the information provided decide whether or not to accept the treatment offered.

Systems, processes and guidance were in place to inform staff on how to maintain patients' independence, choice and control. These included staff training in consent and clinical staff in advanced life decision making policies. The practice employed a multi-disciplinary approach to end-of-life care involving other health and social care professionals as well as the patient and where appropriate loved ones and carers. Staff training including awareness of the Mental Capacity Act, safeguarding and learning disability and autism.

We received no specific feedback from patients regarding their experiences of how this provider responded to their immediate needs. Feedback in the National GP Survey results with the former provider found improvement was required in this area. The new provider had installed a new telephone system with a call back facility. They had started to monitor patients' responses to the changes they had made. They had developed an action plan based on the responses to the survey results from the former provider to improve patients overall experience at the practice.

Staff told us palliative care patients had access to a direct telephone line to the practice in order that requests could be actioned promptly to support them and their families. This included anticipatory medicines and cancer care support. A designated duty GP responded to any urgent needs for patients and vulnerable groups. For patients with clinical diagnosis that required steroids when acutely unwell, the practice operated a system whereby the clinician could provide a ‘steroid card’ for the patient to present at reception. This enabled a follow up appointment to be booked within 2 weeks to ensure adequate recovery. GPs triaged patients who required a home visit. For certain home visit requests for certain procedures such as phlebotomy or chronic disease management, these were available through community-based teams.

Leaders told us they recognised the importance of their staff health and wellbeing. Staff reported positively on the leadership workforce and wellbeing systems. They told us their health and wellbeing were considered, promoted and supported by leaders. Social events were organised and costs for light lunch during protected learning times were met by the partners. Staff were able to provide personal insights into how their wellbeing had been supported at times of need, for example following difficult incoming calls. Access to clinical support and guidance via the GPs was described by other clinical staff as excellent. Staff found the GPs provided their time and expertise to support them in their role and decision making.

The practice had a health and wellbeing policy in place in addition to a lone working policy. Its aim was to support employees with their health and wellbeing by providing safe working spaces, encouraging an open culture regarding wellbeing, and providing internal support (where appropriate), as well as signposting employees to external sources of support, for issues which may well be beyond the remit of the organisation. The practice policy reflected upon the practice values which encouraged an open management style whereby managers were approachable, and employees felt able to discuss their health and wellbeing, where it impacts them at work.