Kingsbury Court 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

We carried out an announced assessment of one quality statement, equity of access, on 21 March 2024. We found the practice had used patient feedback to drive improvement. Services were designed to make them accessible for people most likely to have difficulty accessing care. The provider monitored data and information to implement changes to improve access for patients.

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 GP patient survey in 2023 showed patient satisfaction in line with national averages regarding appointment type, time, and the overall experience of making an appointment. Patient satisfaction with access to the practice via telephone was slightly lower than the national average. The practice repeated this survey using the same questions and received a higher number of responses (3.09% of the practice population compared to 1.01% for the National GP patient survey). The survey was available in electronic and paper format. Unverified data showed higher satisfaction scores from the practice’s own survey regarding access via telephone, overall experience of making an appointment and the type of appointment offered compared with the National GP patient survey results and local and national averages. Feedback directly from patients was positive about the service provided. We heard that patients had a choice of the type of appointment offered (for example, telephone or face to face) and could access appointments when they needed them. We were told the practice acted on feedback from patients. For example, patients said they sometimes found it difficult to find the correct clinical room for their appointment. The practice responded by painting the doors of clinical rooms different colours, making it easier to direct patients to the correct room. There were 2 comments shared directly with CQC. Feedback was mixed, and referred to delays with referrals, difficulty accessing appointments, and a good standard of care. There were 4 reviews on the NHS website, 3 were negative about the service and 1 was positive. Negative comments referred to difficulty accessing appointments and long waits on the telephone. Positive comments referred to easy access to appointments and good follow up processes. The provider had responded to all reviews and asked all patients leaving negative reviews to contact the practice so their concerns could be investigated.

The provider had taken steps to improve access for patients who may find it difficult to access care. For example, the practice was registered as a safe surgery, meaning people could register with the practice without proof of ID or address. The practice worked with a local hotel where asylum seekers were housed. People could access walk in services provided by the practice at the hotel or they could arrange scheduled appointments at the practice. Interpreter services were available to support patients who did not speak English. The practice arranged coffee mornings for carers to provide opportunities for carers to meet each other as well as speak with practice staff. Staff told us transgender patients were supported by the practice. The practice kept a list of patients who may need screening tests but would not be contacted via the national screening programmes (for example, transgender men who required cervical cancer screening) and contacted those patients for screening tests. The practice was open for pre-booked appointments on Saturdays. The practice would occasionally offer “women-only Saturdays” where only female staff and patients would be onsite. This was in an attempt to increase cervical cancer screening uptake by providing a female only environment. The provider told us they used data from the telephone systems to ensure the number of staff answering the telephones met the demand from patients. The practice had also recruited additional reception staff to support patient demand via telephone. Staff told us complaints were discussed in weekly meetings, and themes of complaints were reviewed every 6 months. Patients had raised concerns about the time for referrals to secondary care services. The practice had worked with local hospital trusts to obtain details of named individuals for different specialties who could be contacted for more information on specific referrals and results.

Patients could make appointments with the practice via telephone, online, or in person. Self-booking was also an option for some clinics, for example flu vaccinations and cervical cancer screening. Patients were usually offered a face to face appointment in the first instance, but telephone appointments could also be requested. The practice was open from 8am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Extended access pre-booked appointments were available from 6.30pm to 8pm on Monday, Wednesday and Thursday and from 9am to 5pm on Saturday. Out of hours services were provided by NHS 111.

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.