Enter and view: Woodbridge Practice

Download (PDF 318KB)

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Stockton-on-Tees conducted an announced Enter and View visit to Woodbridge Practice on 6th May 2015. The visit was planned following on from intelligence received by Healthwatch regarding a number of issues including the organisation of appointments at the Woodbridge Practice. The visit aimed to listen to patients and staff about the experiences of being a patient at the practice with a view to making recommendations for improvements to the provider. The feedback and views were captured through a short survey and observations. The general comments received were that overall the practice was good, and patients were satisfied with the services. There was a feeling though that the waiting time to secure a routine appointment was ‘unacceptable’ and the method was inefficient. Patients also expressed being uncomfortable with the reception staff acting as ‘Gatekeepers’ to the doctors and asking for personal medical information before letting the patients see the GP. Staff told the team that they were required to ensure that the GP saw only those patients who could not be seen by a Nurse Practitioner. Healthwatch made recommendations about reviewing the appointment system and giving the patients’ more choice. There is a long and detailed response from the practice explaining their policies about these points.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Enter and view: Woodbridge Practice
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Stockton-on-tees
Date of publication 
Thursday, 10 September, 2015
Date evidence capture began 
Thursday, 9 July, 2015
Date evidence capture finished 
Thursday, 9 July, 2015
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
Decor
Quality of appointment
Staff levels
Support
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-5418

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
No
Primary research method used 
Observation
Survey
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 
Announced

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 
24
Age group 
All
Gender 
All
Ethnicity 
All
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
No
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
No
Does the information include staff's views? 
Yes
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
Administrative
Service manager
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 but provider disagrees
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
No
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
No

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.