Aston Healthcare Limited

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 assessed two quality statements in the responsive key question and found areas of concern in the equity in access quality statement. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Though the assessment of these areas indicated areas of concern, our rating for the key question remains good. People were not always able to access care and treatment in a timely way. However, the provider organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes.

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.

Patient feedback about their experience of accessing the practice was mostly negative. The percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who were very satisfied or fairly satisfied with their GP practice appointment times was a negative variation of 22.57% in April 2023 compared to the integrated care board (ICB) average of 40,13% and national average of 52.79%. The percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who responded positively to the overall experience of making an appointment was 30.21% in April 2023, which was a negative variation to the ICB average of 42.07% and the national average of 54.40%. The percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who were satisfied with the appointment (or appointments) they were offered was 58.91% in April 2023 which was a negative variation to the ICB average of 66.39% and the national average of 72.04%. The percentage of respondents to the GP patient survey who responded positively to how easy it was to get through to someone at their GP practice on the phone was 31.05% in April 2023 which was below the national average of 49.59%. However, people could expect their care, treatment and support to be accessible and in line with best practice, quality standards and legal requirements, including those on equality and human rights. This included making reasonable adjustments for disabled people, addressing communication barriers and having accessible premises.

Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people in accessing care, treatment and support, whether this was from wider society, within organisational processes and culture or from individuals.

Patient appointments were available either online, face to face, telephone, or as a home visit. Patients could book appointments by telephone, online, or walking in. A mixture of on the day and pre-bookable appointments were available. The provider actively monitored staffing rotas and demand in order to change if necessary. The provider was introducing a care navigation tool. Care navigation is a way for general practice staff to ensure patients are being directed to the most appropriate course of care through specially trained care navigators. Leaders told us all staff were trained in care navigation. There was information available for patients to support them to understand how to access services (including on websites and telephone messages). The provider rolled out their new website in April 2024 which was more user friendly for people. However, the provider did not demonstrate they used people’s feedback to actively seek to improve access for people more likely to experience barriers or delays in accessing their care. This data was collected but not analysed.

The patients we spoke with during our assessment commented that they would appreciate more support for older people and others who may be unable to gain online access to the practice.

Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage different groups of people using their services, whether from wider society, culture or from individuals. Leaders proactively sought out ways to address these barriers to improve people’s experience, act on information about people's experiences and outcomes and allocate resources and opportunities to achieve equity.

The provider complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes.

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.