Kenwood 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: Patients’ response to the 2023 national GP survey regarding access to the surgery was positive and above the national average. The provider had responded to patient feedback. The practice identified and allocated resources as required to improve inequalities and support equity of access. The leaders understood the challenges of and monitored patient access and responded to patient needs. No breaches of regulation were identified.

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 appointments were available either online, face to face, by telephone, or as a home visit. Patients could book appointments by telephone, online, walking in and could also submit medical or administrative requests online via the practice website. Patients could book routine appointments in advance and same-day appointments were available each morning. The practice was open from 8am to 6:30pm from Monday to Friday. GP and nurse appointments were available from 8am to 6:30pm all weekdays with the exception of Thursday afternoon when GP appointments were not available. The practice also offered appointments from a variety of clinical staff for example, physiotherapist, clinical pharmacist, phlebotomist, podiatry, social prescriber and a nurse associate. Patients had access to services provided by the GP federation. For example, a GP out of hours service from 6:30pm to 8pm weekdays, and from 8am to 8pm on a Saturday and Sunday. And other healthcare professionals who carried out vaccinations or long-term health condition reviews from 6:30pm to 9:30pm weekdays and Saturdays from 8:30pm to 5pm. The leaders monitored patient demand and capacity regarding the appointment system to ensure patients’ needs were met. They could identify patients who did not attend appointments and those with multiple appointments. The practice had arrangements in place for prioritising patients. Staff had mostly completed care navigation training, and the practice had a triage system for staff to follow and staff were supported by the clinicians. The practice provided access to an interpretation service for patients who did not have English language as a first language. The patient record system was used to alert staff to any access requirement the patient had to help enable effective communication with the patient. Information was available in alternative languages, including on the practice website.

We reviewed the practice’s results for 2021 to 2023 of the national GP patient survey which is taken annually between 1 January and 31 March. This showed patients responded positively when asked how easy it was to get through to someone at their GP practice on the phone, how satisfied they were with their GP practice appointment times, and their overall experience of making an appointment. The GP survey results for these questions were above the national average since 2023. The provider submitted the practice’s friends and family patient feedback from 1 April 2023 to 31 January 2024. This asked patients how likely they were to recommend the practice, 216 out of 230 patients stated the would be extremely likely or likely to recommend the practice. Staff had carried out their own patient survey about access to the practice, 177 patients responded to the survey. The patients were asked how easy it was to schedule their appointment and all stated it was either very or somewhat easy. They were also asked how they would rate the waiting time at the practice, and 154 stated it was excellent, 16 stated it was good and 7 stated it was fair. We spoke with two members of the patient participation group who described staff as responding to patient feedback.

Staff told us how the practice provided opportunities and support for different groups of patient population to overcome health inequalities, including adjustments to the registration and how patients could communicate with the practice. The leaders explained about the ways the practice was working with other local stakeholders to improve access to primary care. The leaders explained they monitored patients access to appointments and the telephone usage and responded to the demands. In addition, they had carried out a quality improvement project to improve access in 2022/2023. This resulted in increased use of the online services and an increase in the number of GPs and administration staff. The leaders explained access to primary care network (PCN) appointments had also improved patients access to specific clinicians, for example a clinical pharmacist, a first contact physiotherapist, and a social prescriber. The practice used a triage system where reception staff would ask the patient for enough information to make a decision regarding which clinician was appropriate for them to see. Patients were given the option of a face to face, telephone or online appointment when contacting the practice. Patients who had a request for an emergency appointment were seen the same day. Patient appointments were available online, face to face, telephone, or as a home visit. 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. Patients had access to an interpretation service for patients for whom English language was not their first language and for patients whose hearing was impaired. The practice website enabled patients to choose their preferred language. The practice had installed features that cater to individuals with disabilities to promote inclusiveness.

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.