Enter and View: Woodlands Park Surgery

Download (PDF 1.01MB)
You voted 'No'.

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Windsor, Ascot and Maidenhead undertook an Enter and View visit to Woodlands Park Surgery on November 29th, 2019. The purpose of the visit was to observe patients engaging with staff and their surroundings, capture the experience of patients and record any ideas they may have to improve the services.  

Healthwatch staff found that the surgery was mainly clean and tidy, the waiting room well decorated; there were only four parking spaces and a disabled parking bay outside the surgery; variety of information and leaflets were available however, display was confusing with some information obscured; reception staff were friendly and welcoming; privacy around reception area was good. The report also contains one response from the Patient Participation Group survey.

The surgery's website was also reviewed by Healthwatch staff and they found easy to find and clear information, but some were out of date and some links were broken. There were areas where additional information could be included/expanded. The site has a language changer and a link to AbilityNet.

The report made 9 recommendations and contains a response from the providers for some of the comments.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Enter and View: Woodlands Park Surgery
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Windsor, Ascot & Maidenhead
Date of publication 
Wednesday, 4 March, 2020
Date evidence capture began 
Friday, 29 November, 2019
Date evidence capture finished 
Friday, 29 November, 2019
Type of report 
Enter and view
Key themes 
Access
Booking appointments
Building and facilities
Car parking access
Car parking charges
Cleanliness hygiene and infection control
Communication between staff and patients
Digitalisation of services
Information providing
Prescription
Staff attitudes
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-5267

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
No
What type of organisation requested the work 
N/A
If this work has been done in partnership, who is the partner? 
None
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 
17
Age group 
All
Gender 
All
Ethnicity 
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
No
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
Yes
Does the information include staff's views? 
No
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
N/A
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? 
No
What type of impact was determined? 
Tangible Impact (cost related)
Tangible impact (not 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.