- GP practice
Grove Park Surgery
Report from 11 September 2024 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Chiswick Medical Practice is a NHS GP practice situated within the North-West London integrated care system (ICS) and delivers General Medical Services (GMS) to a population of almost 22,000 people within the London Borough of Hounslow. This is part of a contract held with NHS England. The practice is part of a wider Chiswick Primary Care Network (PCN) of six practices. The practice is a merger of three practices; Grove Park Surgery, Chiswick Family Doctors Practice and Wellesley Road Surgery. The practice is also an NHS GP training practice. The practice is made up of four GP partners, eight salaried GPs, a nurse practitioner, two practice nurses and four healthcare assistants. The GPs are supported at the practice by a management team comprising a business manager, an operations manager and a finance manager. There is a team of administration and reception staff, and all staff work across the three sites on a rota basis. The practice is open between 8 am to 6.30 pm Monday to Friday. The population registered with the practice is 68% working age people, 18% children & young people and 13% older people. People requiring an appointment must complete an online form. People with no digital access must phone the practice or attend in person where staff transcribe the request for them. GPs assess and prioritise patients based on clinical need. We conducted this assessment to assess the standards of care people had received since the merger. We assessed all quality statements across safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well-led key questions. At this assessment, we rated the practice as good overall and good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. However, some improvements were needed in relation to the learning culture and people’s satisfaction with the service provided.
People's experience of this service
During the assessment we reviewed people’s feedback from a variety of sources to get a proportionate view of satisfaction with the service. Overall people’s feedback was very mixed. A total of 27 people shared their experiences directly with us. Most of the feedback was negative with a small number of positive responses. The main concerns shared with us were apprehension to raise concerns, frustration with the online form, and negative attitudes of staff. NHS choices reviews showed mixed responses. From 29 reviews, eleven were rated five-star. People commented that it was a great service, good improvements with the new telephone call back system, and prompt appointments after filling out the online form. However, ten reviews were rated one-star. Comments showed disappointment with the changes since the merger, poor communication, difficult to get appointments and impersonal staff. Online reviews were positive showing a 4.6 out of five-star rating based on 86 reviews. The results of the NHS Friends and Family Test for the year to date, showed that 803 respondents rated the practice as ‘very good’ or ‘good’ and 195 respondents rated the practice as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’. We reviewed the views of 50 people gathered by the local Healthwatch. Negative comments included difficulties arranging appointments, particularly for older people, and getting through on the telephone. However, there were also positive comments about staff. Comments included the doctors are great, professional and experienced and staff are very friendly. Surveys conducted by the practice also had mixed responses. For example, a recent survey with 337 responses showed a 3.7-star rating for the service received, a 3.4-star rating for satisfaction with the online form, and a four-star rating for people’s expectations being met. The practice also shared with us some compliment cards they had received from people.