Enter and view: The Neaman Practice, City of London

Download (PDF 613KB)

Summary of report content

On 14th February 2019, Healthwatch City of London visited the Neaman Practice, the sole GP practice in the City of London, and interviewed patients about their experiences after receiving routine comments and feedback from the service users.

The report summarised the observations noted during the visit. There was first aid box, blood pressure machine, defibrillator and fire alarms, good access for disabled people and clean toilets on each floor. The environment was smart but needed some re-organisation. There were lots of posters and leaflets on the walls and windows, but the display was confusing. No hand sanitizers or water dispenser was noted. The practice website was out of date, confusing and misleading.

A feedback from 20 patients reported that they were generally happy with the quality of care they received, however, some had trouble with making appointments and there was a significant wait to get a non-urgent consultation.

The report recommended to completely overhaul the website; improve seating in the 2nd floor waiting room; reorganise the ground floor to allow greater privacy around the reception desk room for a queuing system; have readily available complaints leaflet; improve staff name display and wear visible badges; use texting systems for all important communications; have greater clarity about referrals for further treatment and review using University College Hospital instead of Homerton Hospital for such referrals; for Healthwatch City of London to start collecting regular feedback from practice users.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Enter and view: The Neaman Practice, City of London
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch City of London
Date of publication 
Thursday, 14 February, 2019
Date evidence capture began 
Tuesday, 14 May, 2019
Date evidence capture finished 
Tuesday, 14 May, 2019
Type of report 
Enter and view
Key themes 
Booking appointments
Building and facilities
Cleanliness hygiene and infection control
Communication between staff and patients
Complaints procedure
Information providing
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Waiting times and lists for treatment
Healthwatch reference number 

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
Primary research method used 
Unstructured Interview
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 

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 
Age group 
All people 18 and over
Specific ethnicity if known 
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
Does the information include staff's views? 
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
Service manager
Does the information include other people's views? 
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 

Outcomes and impact

Were recommendations made by local Healthwatch in the report? 
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Yes action has been taken or promised
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
What type of impact was determined? 
Tangible Impact (cost related)

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.