Enter and view: Dr Motala's surgery Nuneaton

Download (PDF 375KB)

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Warwickshire conducted an enter and view visit on Dr Motala's GP surgery in Nuneaton on the 12th September 2016. The surgery has the equivalent to one full time GP and one practice nurse and serves 2400 patients. Observations from the visit mention that the surgery is a converted house with the exterior well maintained, double glazed etc. with a car park to rear. They noted that some of the seating had damage but were comfortable. It consisted of mainly fixed bench seating but there were chairs with arms for the less mobile. 16 people completed a questionnaire giving their views and rating areas as either poor, average, good or excellent. Comments from patients included: “Need a bit more parking.” “Usually good.” “Problems with double buggy so some wheelchairs must not fit either.” The report makes two recommendations: - Informing patients on the day of any delays which may impact their appointment. Good practice seen at other surgeries has involved a notice board in Reception to notify patients of current waiting times. - To look at the current ticket system in place as some of the tickets used need replacing. The report contains a response from the provider.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Enter and view: Dr Motala's surgery Nuneaton
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Warwickshire
Date of publication 
Wednesday, 30 November, 2016
Date evidence capture began 
Monday, 12 September, 2016
Date evidence capture finished 
Monday, 12 September, 2016
Type of report 
Enter and view
Key themes 
Access
Administration
Booking appointments
Building and facilities
Car parking access
Cleanliness hygiene and infection control
Communication between staff and patients
Decor
Health and safety
Quality of appointment
Quality of staffing
Quality of treatment
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Staff attitudes
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-5556

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
Not known
What type of organisation requested the work 
N/A
Primary research method used 
Observation
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 
Not Known

Details of health and care services included in the report

Primary care services 
GP practice

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
16
Age group 
Not known
Gender 
Not known
Ethnicity 
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Yes
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
No
Does the information include staff's views? 
No
Does the information include other people's views? 
No
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 
Mixed

Outcomes and impact

Were recommendations made by local Healthwatch in the report? 
Yes
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Yes action has been taken or promised
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Yes
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
Not known
What type of impact was determined? 
Implied Impact

Network Impact
Relationships that exist locally, regionally, nationally have benefited from the work undertaken in the report
 
Implied Impact
Where it is implied that change may occur in the future as a result of Healthwatch work. This can be implied in a provider  response, press release or other source. Implied impact can become tangible impact once change has occurred.
 
Tangible Impact
There is evidence of change that can be directly attributed to Healthwatch work undertaken in the report.