Report - Primary Health Care Online

Claypath and University Medical Group 

Patient Participation Report 

2012/13 

March, 2013 

1

CONTENTS 

1. Introduction 

a) Establishment of Patient Participation Group 

b) Establishment of On-line Patient Reference Group 

2. Profile of members of Patient Participation Group and On-line 

Patient Reference Group 

a) Patient Participation Group 

b) On-line Patient Reference Group 

c) Steps taken to ensure groups are representative of registered patients 

d) Identification of patient categories not represented and steps taken to 

engage 

3. Reaching agreement on issues to include in practice patient 

surveys 

4. Practice Patient Surveys 2012/13 - How the views of registered 

patients were sought 

5. Practice Patient Surveys - their findings 

a) University Health Centre Patient Survey Report 

b) Claypath Medical Centre Patient Survey Report 

6. Development of Action Plans 

a) University Health Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 2012/13 

(from June, 2012, Patient Survey) 

b) Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 2013/14 

(from January, 2013, Patient Survey) 

7. Monitoring of Patient Satisfaction Action Plans 2012/13 

a) Progress in achieving University Health Centre Patient 

Satisfaction Action Plan 2012/13 objectives 

b) Progress in achieving Claypath Medical Centre Patient 

Satisfaction Action Plan objectives (from January, 2012 Patient 

Survey and from January, 2013 Patient Survey) 

8. Opening hours of practice premises 

9. Extended Hours 2012/13 

10. Practice website + publication of Patient Participation Report 

2012/13 

2

APPENDICES: 

Appendix 1 

Appendix 2 

Appendix 3 

Appendix 4 

Terms of Reference and Code of Conduct of Patient 

Participation Group 

On-line Patient Reference Group Sign-Up Form 

University Health Centre - Annual Patient Survey 

Questionnaire - June, 2012 

Claypath Medical Centre - Annual Patient Survey 

Questionnaire - January, 2013 

Appendix 5 Patient Participation Group notes - 16 th February, 2012 

Appendix 6 Patient Participation Group notes - 29 th November, 2012 

Appendix 7 

University Health Centre - Annual Patient Survey Report 

2012 

Appendix 8 Patient Participation Group notes - 19 th July, 2012 

Appendix 9 

Claypath Medical Centre - Annual Patient Survey Report 

2013 

Appendix 10 Patient Participation Group notes - 14 h February, 2013 

Appendix 11 

Appendix 12 

Appendix 13 

University Health Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 

2012/13 (from June, 2012, Patient Survey) + monitoring 

Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 

2013/14 (from January, 2013, Patient Survey) 

Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 

2012/13 (from January, 2012, Patient Survey) + monitoring 

[END] 

3

1. Introduction 

a) Establishment of Patient Participation Group 

The practice has participated in programmes of patient involvement for 

many years with differing amounts of success. In October, 2007, 

however, the practice‟s Patient Participation Group was re-established on 

the appointment of a new General Manager, since when it has met on a 

quarterly basis. 

The Group is made up of patients and practice staff. The practice General 

Manager, her Deputy, and one GP Partner, attend each meeting, with 

other staff attending as appropriate. Patient membership includes patients 

registered at both practice sites i.e. the Claypath Medical Centre and the 

University Health Centre. 

Patient membership fluctuates and it is, therefore, important that the 

Group is regularly promoted within the practice on posters, prescription 

slips, and by word of mouth by clinicians. In addition, the group has had its 

own section in the practice website since June, 2008. The practice 

regularly seeks new members to join the Patient Participation Group to 

encourage a wider representation of our patient population. 

By working together to understand the needs of the surgery and its 

patients, we aim to: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

learn more about our patients' experiences; 

make sure services are designed and adapted to respond better to 

our patients' needs; 

tap into the enthusiasm and energy of our patients to make longterm 

improvements; 

develop and encourage closer working relationships between staff 

and patients; 

promote patient education; 

improve the quality of care we provide; 

identify ways of meeting patients' needs more appropriately; 

be able to use information provided by patients to help make 

improvements; 

make sure changes make sense to those that are affected by 

them. 

The Terms of Reference of our Patient Participation Group and Code of 

Conduct are attached at Appendix 1. 

b) Establishment of On-line Patient Reference Group 

We understand that it is difficult for some patients to attend meetings. 

With this in mind the practice established an on-line Patient Reference 

Group in 2011 in addition to its Patient Participation Group. Members of 

4

our on-line group are contacted by e-mail from time to time and 

asked questions on how we can improve the services the practice 

provides and how they perceive our surgery and staff. 

The practice aims to establish an on-line group of around 100 registered 

patients from as broad a spectrum as possible in order to get a 

representative sample. We recognise that we need young people, those 

in employment, unemployed, or retired, people with long-term conditions, 

people from non-British ethnic groups, etc. In particular we are keen to 

engage University students who are patients at our University Health 

Centre site, and who make up 50% of our registered population. We hope 

that our on-line group will be a more attractive means of engagement for 

students, as well as other registered patients. 

Patients interested in joining the on-line Patient Reference Group can do 

so by completing and sending back the sign-up form on-line or by 

downloading a copy of the form from our practice website and returning it 

to reception at either site. Copies of the sign-up form are available at 

reception at both sites. A copy of this form is included as Appendix 2. 

2. Profile of members of Patient Participation Group and On-line 

Patient Reference Group 

All patient members of our Patient Participation Group and On-line Patient 

Reference Group are registered patients of the practice. 

a) Patient Participation Group 

Our Patient Participation Group (PPG) currently has 19 patient 

representatives and 3 practice representatives. 

The profile of the 19 patient representatives is as follows: 

13 females and 6 males:- 

1 in the age range 25-34yrs (representing University students) 

1 in the age range 45-54yrs 




1 in the age range 84yrs over 

The ethnic background of our patient representatives is White British. 

They generally visit the practice on a regular basis, and are predominantly 

retired. One is a carer for her daughter who has a learning disability. Their 

health interests/priorities include: 

 

 

 

Access to equal health opportunities for people with learning 

disabilities; 

Care of the elderly, at home, and in nursing homes or hospital; 

Healthy lifestyles; 

5

Side effects of medications; 

Physiotherapy; 

Chronic disease e.g. heart/stomach problems; hypertension; 

strokes 

Dermatology 

b) On-line Patient Reference Group 

The practice Patient Reference Group was established in November, 

2011. To-date only fifty-one patients have signed-up. This compares with 

a total of fourteen members this time last year! Their profile is as follows: 

27 females and 24 males:- 







Their ethnic background is: 30 X White British; 2 x Asian/Asian British; 2 X 

Mixed -White & Asian; 8 X Chinese; 9 x Other Ethnic Group. Nineteen 

visit the practice on a regular basis; eleven occasionally; and twenty-one 

rarely. 

c) Steps taken to ensure groups are representative of registered 

patients 

The practice has taken a number of steps to try to encourage patients 

from as broad a spectrum as possible to join both the Patient Participation 

Group and the on-line Patient Reference Group. 

 

 

 

 

Posters are on display in all waiting areas at both practice sites 

indicating that the practice is keen to engage with as many patients 

as possible to get a representative sample of our practice 

population e.g. young people, University students, those in 

employment, unemployed or retired, people from non-British ethnic 

groups, etc. 

Clinical staff are reminded to promote both groups to patients who 

they consider may be interested. 

The groups have been promoted on prescription slips when there 

are less pressing issues to bring to the attention of patients i.e. 

when the practice is not actively seeking patients for flu vaccines, 

etc. 

The practice website has a specific Patient Participation section 

promoting both groups; in addition new members are regularly 

6

sought on the practice website homepage and within the “Surgery 

news” section. 

 

 

 

The practice recognises that those who work and/or have young 

families, as well as students, may not have the time or be able to 

attend quarterly meetings in the early evening when other patients 

have indicated this is the best time to meet. The practice has, 

therefore, established an on-line Patient Reference Group in 

addition to maintaining its Patient Participation Group which it is 

hoped will be a more attractive means of engagement for this large 

group of patients. This helps to ensure that the practice is engaged 

with a much more representative group of patients on its registered 

list. 

As 50% of the practice‟s patients are students, the practice also 

liaises with Durham Student Union (DSU) regarding the best way to 

engage with students. As a result the DSU Welfare and Education 

Officer is a member and regular attender of the Patient Participation 

Group. 

Arrangements are being made through the DSU to promote the online 

Patient Reference Group in the DSU “Dialogue” bulletin (which 

has previously been used by the practice to promote practice 

service provision) and to send bulletins to Welfare Officers in each 

college for their individual college newsletters. 

d) Identification of patient categories not represented and steps 

taken to engage 

The practice acknowledges that the categories of patients it has to engage 

with further include: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

More students 

Young families 

Middle aged people with and without families 

Carers 

Patients from ethnic backgrounds other than “White British” 

Patients with a status other than “Retired” 

As 50% of our patients are students, the practice has predominantly 

focused its attention on student engagement - see steps outlined in c) 

above. 

In the future it is intended to engage with the other groups identified above 

by promoting the Patient Participation Group and On-line Patient 

Reference Group to patients on the practice‟s Carers‟ Register, and 

patients attending the practice‟s Baby Clinics and Chronic Disease Clinics. 

7

3. Reaching agreement on issues to include in practice patient 

surveys 

The practice has for a number of years been undertaking its own patient 

surveys at each site i.e. Claypath Medical Centre (CMC) and University 

Health Centre (UHC). 

Prior to each survey the Patient Participation Group meets to agree issues 

of priority and to determine the questions to be included in each survey 

questionnaire. The two survey questionnaires used in 2012/13 are 

attached as follows: 

University Health Centre survey questionnaire, June, 2012 (Appendix 3) 

Claypath Medical Centre survey questionnaire, January, 2013 (Appendix 

4) 

The survey questionnaires were discussed at the following Patient 

Participation Group meetings: 

Patient Participation Group meeting held on 16 th February, 2012 

- UHC survey questionnaire discussed and amendments/revisions 

sought (see notes of meeting attached at Appendix 5). In addition 

the UHC survey questionnaire was also discussed at a meeting 

between the practice and the DSU Welfare and Education Officer 

after which further comments on the questionnaire were forwarded 

to the practice manager. 

- It was agreed not to make any significant changes to the UHC 

survey questionnaire in order to undertake a direct comparison of 

survey results with those of previous years. 

Patient Participation Group meeting held on 29 November, 2012 

- CMC survey questionnaire discussed and amendments/revisions 

sought (see notes of meeting attached at Appendix 6). 

- it was agreed not to make any significant changes to the CMC 

Survey questionnaire this year in order for a direct comparison of 

survey response rates per question to be compared with the 

previous year. An additional question, however, to ascertain 

patients‟ awareness of the 111 Out of Hours Service was added. 

4. Practice Patient Surveys 2012/13 - How the views of registered 

patients were sought 

The practice undertook two surveys during 2012/13, one at each site, as 

follows: 

University Health Centre survey - June, 2012 

The survey commenced on 4 th June, 2012. 250 survey questionnaires 

were handed out to patients to complete as they waited for their 

8

appointments and then to return to reception before they left the surgery. 

The questionnaires were then forwarded to the practice manager for 

analysis. The survey took approximately two weeks to complete. 

At the same time the survey questionnaire was e-mailed to the practice‟s 

Virtual Patient Reference Group to complete on-line. Members of the 

group were given two weeks to complete the survey questionnaire i.e. by 

17 th June, 2012. 

The survey was also promoted on the practice website to encourage 

patients to sign up to the Patient Reference Group in order to participate. 

Claypath Medical Centre survey - January, 2013 

The survey commenced on 14 th January, 2013, and 250 survey 

questionnaires were handed out. The survey methodology was the same 

as for the UHC survey in June, 2012. This survey was also e-mailed to 

the practice‟s Virtual Patient Reference Group and promoted on the 

practice website. 

5. Practice Patient Surveys - their findings 

a) University Health Centre Patient Survey Report 2012 

Of the 250 survey questionnaires handed out to patients in the surgery 

176 questionnaires were returned, resulting in a response rate of 70.4%. 

The Patient Reference Group had 28 members during the survey period 

who were all e-mailed a copy of the survey. 8 questionnaires were 

returned, resulting in a response rate of 28.6%. 

Overall, therefore, the practice sent out 278 questionnaires of which 184 

were returned, resulting in an overall response rate of 66.19%. 

The responses were analysed and set out in a survey report (Appendix 7) 

which was discussed at the Patient Participation Group at its meeting on 

19 th July, 2012 (see Appendix 8) 

The Patient Participation Group concluded that patients were generally 

happy with the patient environment, standard of care provided by doctors 

and nurses, but had some concerns regarding making appointments to 

see a doctor and the length of waiting time at Open Surgeries. 

It was noted that if patients rang requesting an urgent same day 

appointment all patients would be asked if possible to attend the surgery 

and arrangements would be made for them to be seen. Those unable to 

attend the surgery would be offered a home visit. 

It was acknowledged that the waiting time in Open Surgeries could be 

long but it was not considered bad for a patient to have to wait up to 1hr 

for an appointment which had not been booked in advance. Reception 

9

staff would continue to advise patients at reception of the likely waiting 

time, and if patients were concerned whilst waiting they should ask. 

The meeting further reviewed the survey results and discussed areas 

where improvements could be made. A number of actions were 

suggested, which it was agreed to include in a draft action plan to be 

discussed and finalised at the next meeting of the Group. No significant 

changes were proposed which would impact on contracted 

services/arrangements. 

b) Claypath Medical Centre Patient Survey Report 

Of the 250 survey questionnaires distributed at the Claypath Medical 

Centre in January, 2013, 226 questionnaires were returned. The survey 

questionnaire was also sent to the 60 members of the Patient Reference 

Group of which 8 were returned. Overall, therefore, 234 survey 

questionnaires were returned out of a total of 310, giving a response rate 

of 75.48%. 

The responses were analysed and set out in a survey report (Appendix 9) 

which was discussed at the Patient Participation Group at its meeting on 

14 th February, 2013 (see Appendix 10). 

It was noted that the survey results demonstrated that practice 

achievement was very good in most areas. It was agreed that the practice 

should review how it communicated messages to patients given that 

nearly a third of those surveyed were unaware that booked appointments 

were for 10minutes, and half were unaware that they could pre-book 

appointments with a doctor up to two weeks in advance. Over half were 

also unaware of the practice‟s extended opening hours. 

A number of comments had been made in relation to the upkeep of the 

surgery, and it was noted that this was being addressed through a phased 

refurbishment plan. Demand for car parking would always be greater than 

that provided – it was considered, however, that the introduction of some 

on-line facilities e.g. ordering repeat prescriptions and booking 

appointments on line, could reduce the number of patients having to 

attend the practice and use the car park. 

The meeting further reviewed the survey results and discussed areas 

where improvements could be made. A number of actions were identified 

and these were included in an action plan. No significant changes were 

proposed which would impact on contracted services/arrangements. 

10

6. Development of Action Plans 

a) University Health Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 

2012/13 (from June, 2012, Patient Survey) 

Following discussion of the UHC Patient Survey Report at the Patient 

Participation Group on 19 th July, 2012, a draft action plan was developed 

and subsequently circulated to the Group for their comments. A final draft 

plan was then shared with the Group at its meeting on 29 th November, 

2012, (Appendix 6) and a final UHC Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 

agreed (Appendix 11). A “monitoring” column was added to the plan and 

an update provided on progress with action points to date.. 

b) Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan 

2013/14 (from January, 2013, Patient Survey) 

Following discussion of the CMC Patient Survey Report at the Patient 

Participation Group on 14 th February, 2013, (Appendix 10) an action plan 

was also developed taking into account issues raised by members of the 

Group. This is attached at Appendix 12. 

7. Monitoring of Patient Satisfaction Action Plans 

One of the key objectives of the Patient Participation as set out in the 

Terms of Reference of the Group (Appendix 1) is “to review the Patient 

Survey Action Plan”. This is, therefore, a standard item on the agenda of 

all meetings. 

a) Progress in achieving University Health Centre Patient 

Satisfaction Action Plan 2012/13 objectives 

As set out above, the UHC Patient Satisfaction Action Plan was finalised 

at the Patient Participation Group meeting on 29 th November, 2012, and 

an update provided on progress with action points to date. Progress on 

action points was further reviewed at the Patient Participation Group on 

14 th February, 2013, and the Action Plan (Appendix 11) was updated to 

include a “monitoring column” recording progress up to 14 th February, 

2013. 

b) Progress in achieving Claypath Medical Centre Patient 

Satisfaction Action Plan objectives (from January, 2012 Patient 

Survey and from January, 2013 Patient Survey) 

At its meeting on 29 th November, 2012, the meeting reviewed progress in 

achieving the action points in the previous year‟s CMC Annual Patient 

Satisfaction Action Plan i.e. actions developed from January, 2012 Patient 

Survey. A copy of this action plan is attached at Appendix 13 clearly 

showing the addition of a “Monitoring” column and notes on progress 

against each action point. 

11

It is not possible to include a monitoring column in the CMC Annual 

Patient Satisfaction Action Plan derived from the January, 2013, Patient 

Survey as this has only recently been developed at the Patient 

Participation Group meeting on 14 th February, 2013. Monitoring of action 

points from the CMC Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey will commence at 

the next meeting of the Patient Participation Group in July, 2013. 

8. Opening hours of practice premises 

The Claypath Medical Centre is open from 8.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. Monday 

to Thursday and until 5.30 p.m. on Friday. The surgery offers same and 

next day doctor appointments, whilst also booking up to two weeks in 

advance. Practice nurses have appointments available throughout the 

day, which can be booked up to three weeks in advance. Appointments 

can be made either by telephone or in person. 

The University Health Centre is open from 8.30 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. Monday 

to Friday. Open Surgeries (just turn up and wait to be seen) are held on 

Monday, Tuesday, and Friday mornings from 9.00 -11.00 a.m. On 

Wednesday this service is provided in the afternoon from 2.00 - 4.00 p.m. 

There is no Open Surgery on a Thursday. Booked surgeries are provided 

when there is no Open Surgery and can be pre-booked by telephone or in 

person. 

(Both surgeries are closed on Tuesdays between 12 noon and 1.00 p.m. 

for staff training.) 

9. Extended Hours 

The practice has been operating extended hours since February, 2008. 

From July, 2011, extended hours of opening have been provided at the 

Claypath Medical Centre site as follows: 

Mondays 

Tuesdays 

6.00 - 8.00 p.m. 

6.00 - 8.00 p.m. 

These extended opening hours are for pre-booked appointments only with 

either a doctor or nurse practitioner. These appointments are primarily for 

patients who find it difficult to access the surgery e.g. workers or others 

who find it difficult to attend during normal opening hours. The 

appointments are supported by reception staff but without telephone cover 

or secretarial cover - general enquiries should, therefore, be made during 

normal surgery opening hours. These arrangements are subject to audit 

and review. 

In the case of emergencies during extended hours patients should access 

the “Out of Hours” Service on Tel: 111 as usual outside our normal 

opening hours. 

12

The practice also participated in the North Durham Clinical Commissioning 

Group‟s initiative that practices provide extended hours provision during 

the weekend from November, 2012, to end February, 2013, in order to 

relieve pressure on urgent care services throughout the winter months. 

As part of this initiative, therefore, the practice provided extended hours of 

opening at the University Health Centre as follows: 

Saturdays 

8.00 a.m. - 5.00 p.m. 

These extended opening hours were for pre-booked appointments with a 

doctor and for walk-in patients as well as patient redirected by the 111 

service. The provision was supported by reception staff but without 

telephone or secretarial cover. Although the initiative was due to finish at 

the end of February, 2013, it is currently extended to end April, 2013, and 

the practice is, therefore, continuing to provide this extension to its 

extended hours of opening. 

10. Practice website + publication of Patient Participation Report 

2012/13 

The practice has had a website since June, 2008. The website can be 

accessed via the following addresses: 

www.claypathdoctors.co.uk; and 

www.durhamstudenthealth.co.uk 

The latter address has been set up specifically for students registered with 

the practice and when accessed immediately enters the student specific 

section of the website. 

The practice website also has a specific “Patient Participation” section 

where this report has been published. 

[END] 

13

APPENDICES 

14

APPENDIX 1 

Patient Participation Group 

Terms of Reference and Code of Conduct 

1. Meetings 

1.1 The meetings will take place every four months with an agenda 

circulated prior to the meeting. 

1.2 The meetings will usually consist of patient representatives, the 

practice General and Deputy Managers and one GP Partner. 

1.3 Other staff may be asked to attend as appropriate. 

1.4 Meetings will usually be of approximately one and a half hours 

duration and be held at the University Health Centre at a mutually 

convenient time to the majority of attendees. This is likely to be 

early evening for members with daytime work commitments and 

to ensure doctors‟ surgeries are not disrupted. 

2. Objectives 

2.1 To review the practice‟s annual patient questionnaire results in 

conjunction with practice representatives. 

2.2 To discuss solutions and improvement plans to address issues 

raised within the questionnaire and to develop a Patient Survey 

Action Plan. 

2.3 To review progress on actions agreed in the Patient Survey 

Action Plan. 

2.4 To advise the practice team on the most appropriate means to 

raise patient awareness about progress and changes made. 

2.3.1 To examine opportunities to improve patient knowledge about 

services provided by the practice, including advising on the 

development of the practice website. 

2.6 To actively promote Patient Participation Group meetings with the 

aim of increasing patient participation within the practice as well 

as group membership. 

3. Code of Conduct 

3.1 An agenda will be circulated prior to the meeting. 

3.2 Minutes of the meeting will be forwarded to all participants – 

including those unable to attend individual meetings. 

15

3.3 The minutes of the meeting will be displayed in practice waiting 

areas. 

3.4 Agenda items and group discussion will be on issues generally 

relevant to the organisation of practice services and facilities for 

patients. 

3.5 Members to respect patient confidentiality at all times. If any 

comments are inadvertently made relating to individual patients 

these will be identified as inappropriate and the issue anonymised 

in the meeting record. 

G P BEVAN 

General Manager 

28 May, 2008 

16

APPENDIX 2 


Sign up to our On-line Patient Reference Group 

The practice wishes to establish a Patient Reference Group in order to periodically consult with patients. This is in addition 

to the Practice Patient Participation Group, which meets on a quarterly basis. 

If you are happy for us to contact you periodically by e-mail please print out and complete this form. The information you 

supply will help to make sure we try to consult with a representative sample of patients registered at our practice and ensure 

our on-line group is representative of our local community. 

Title: 

Mr /Mrs /Miss /Ms 

First name: ___________________________ _____ Surname/Family name: ___________________________ 

E-mail address: _________________________________ 

Telephone: _________________ Postcode: _________ 

__ 

__ 

Your Gender: !__! Male !__! Female 

__ __ __ 

Your Age: !__! Under 16yrs !__! 17 - 24 yrs !__! Over 84 yrs 

__ 

!__! 25 - 34 yrs 

__ 

!__! 45 - 54 yrs 

__ 

!__! 65 - 74 yrs 

__ 

!__! 35 - 44 yrs 

__ 

!__! 55 - 64 yrs 

__ 

!__! 75 - 84 yrs 

With which of the following ethnic backgrounds would you most closely identify 

__ 

__ 

White: !__! British Group !__! Irish 

__ __ __ 

Mixed: 

!__! White & Black Caribbean !__! White & Black Asian !__! White & Asian 

__ __ __ 

Asian or Asian British: !__! Indian !__! Pakistani !__! Bangladeshi 

__ 

__ 

Black or Black British: !__! Caribbean !__! African 

__ 

__ 

Chinese or other ethnic Group: !__! Chinese !__! Any other ___________________________ 

__ __ __ 

How often do you visit the practice !__! Regularly !__! Occasionally !__! Rarely 

__ __ __ 

Are you !__! Employed !__! Unemployed !__! Retired 

__ 

__ 

!__! School student 

!__! Student/Durham University 

__ 

__ 

Are you !__! A Carer !__! Are you responsible for anyone with 

learning disabilities 

Please indicate your health priorities: 

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 

Once completed, please return this form to either the Claypath Medical Centre or University Health Centre reception 

17

University Health Centre 

Green Lane, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3JX 

APPENDIX 3 

Annual Patient Survey 2012 

Dear Patient 

I would be grateful if you would spend a few moments completing this 

questionnaire to let us know what you think about the service provided from the 

University Health Centre. We are very keen to receive your comments, both 

positive and negative. We are here to provide the best medical service we can for 

you. Please let us know what you think. 

On completion, please return this survey to the receptionist. Thank you. 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

………… 

Please rate your answers according to the following scale: 

1 = Very Satisfied 4 = Dissatisfied 

2 = Satisfied 5 = Very dissatisfied 

3 = Neither satisfied or dissatisfied 

RECEPTION 

How satisfied are you with the: 

1. services provided at reception 1 2 3 4 5 

2. efficiency and friendliness of the staff 1 2 3 4 5 

3. ease of making an appointment to see a doctor 1 2 3 4 5 

4. standard of the patient environment within the Health Centre1 2 3 4 5 

CLINICAL 


5. standard of care provided by the nurses 1 2 3 4 5 

6. standard of care provided by the doctors 1 2 3 4 5 

7. Open Surgery service 1 2 3 4 5 

8. Do you have any ideas how we can improve Open Surgery 

Please state: 

............................................................................................................................. ... 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

18

9. Are you aware that nurses should be consulted for contraception YES/NO 

and travel health advice 

OPENING HOURS 

10. How satisfied are you with our opening hours 1 2 3 4 5 

11. Were you aware of the practice‟s extended opening hours for YES/NO 

pre-booked appointments only 

(Claypath Medical Centre Monday/Tuesday evenings up to 8.00 pm) 

ADMINISTRATION 

12. If you have required evidence for mitigating circumstances on an University 

matter (yellow form system) how satisfied were you with the response you 

received from the Health Centre 

N/A 1 2 3 4 5 

13. Were you aware of the practice website www.claypathdoctors.co.uk YES/NO 

and/or specific address for students at www.durhamstudenthealth.co.uk. 

TRAVELHEALTH 

14. Are you aware that we have a travel health clinic which can provide YES/NO 

all vaccinations, including Yellow Fever vaccination 

MENTAL HEALTH 

15. If you have experienced mental health problems, how satisfied were you 

with the health services provided outside the practice 

GENERAL QUESTIONS 

N/A 1 2 3 4 5 

16. Would you recommend the University Health Centre to a friend YES/NO 

17. How would you rate the University Health Centre against your GP surgery 

at home Please indicate whether you feel it is: 

1 = Much better; 2 = Better; 3 = About the same: 4 = Worse; 

5 = Much worse 

N/A 1 2 3 4 5 

Please share with us your thoughts about the service we provide, both positive and 

negative, including things perhaps that we should stop doing and things that you 

would wish us to do that we do not do at present: 

19

……………………………………………………………………………………………... 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

Thank you for completing this survey. The results will be available at the beginning 

of next term. Please return this form to Reception. 

Andrew Kent, University Medical Officer 

May, 2012 

20

Claypath Medical Centre 

26 Gilesgate, Durham DH1 1QW 

APPENDIX 4 

Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey 2013 

Dear Patient 

I would be grateful if you would spend a few moments completing this 

questionnaire to let us know what you think about the services provided from the 

Claypath Medical Centre. We are very keen to receive your comments, both 

positive and negative. We are here to provide the best medical service we can for 

you. Please let us know what you think. 

On completion, please return this survey to the receptionist. Thank you. 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

Please circle one number alongside each question to indicate your level of 

satisfaction using the following scale: 

1 = Very dissatisfied 4 = Satisfied 

2 = Dissatisfied 5 = Very satisfied 

3 = Neither satisfied or dissatisfied 

RECEPTION 


1. services provided by reception 1 2 3 4 5 

2. efficiency and friendliness of the staff 1 2 3 4 5 

3. ease of making an appointment to see a doctor 1 2 3 4 5 

4. Are you aware that booked appointments are for 10 minutes YES/NO 

5. Are you aware that you can pre-book an appointment with a YES/NO 

doctor up to two weeks in advance 

6. Are you aware that you can book an appointment with a Nurse YES/NO 

Practitioner instead of a doctor for minor conditions 

(Please see posters displayed in waiting areas or ask reception for details) 

7. How satisfied are you with the standard of the patient 1 2 3 4 5 

Environment within the Health Centre 

CLINICAL 


8. standard of care provided by the nurses in terms of their 

a) approachability 1 2 3 4 5 

b) quality of listening and interest 1 2 3 4 5 

c) explanations concerning your condition/treatment 1 2 3 4 5 

21

d) caring and concern 1 2 3 4 5 

9. standard of care provided by the doctors in terms of their: 

a) approachability 1 2 3 4 5 

b) quality of listening and interest 1 2 3 4 5 

c) explanations concerning your condition/treatment 1 2 3 4 5 

d) caring and concern 1 2 3 4 5 

OPENING HOURS 

10. Are you aware of the practice‟s extended opening hours for YES/NO 

pre-booked appointments only (Claypath Medical Centre Monday/Tuesday 

evenings 6.00 - 8.00 pm) 

11. How satisfied are you with our opening hours 1 2 3 4 5 


12. Is there anything from your visit to the practice today that you YES/NO 

consider the practice should improve 

…………………………………………………………………………………. 

………………………………………………………………………………….. 

………………………………………………………………………………….. 

13. Are you aware of the NHS 111 service for non-life threatening urgent 

medical help 

YES/NO 

14. Are you aware of the practice website www.claypathdoctors.co.uk YES/NO 

15. Would you recommend the Claypath Medical Centre YES/NO 

Please share with us any additional thoughts you may have about the service we 

provide, both positive and negative, including things perhaps that we should stop 

doing and things that you would wish us to do that we do not do at present: 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

Thank you for completing this survey. Please return this form to Reception. 

The results will be available on request. 

Gillian Bevan, General Manager 

January, 2013 

22

APPENDIX 5 



Notes of the meeting held on Thursday, 16 th February, 2012, at 6.00 p.m., 

Conference Room, University Health Centre, Green Lane. 

PRESENT: 

Gillian Bevan (General Manager) (Chair) 

Andrew Kent (GP Partner) 

Tracy Watson (Deputy General Manager) 

Clive Beddoes 

Robert Feasey 

Barbara Fox 

Janet Gill 

Jack Gill 

Robin Harris 

Marion Holloway 

Debra Hindson 

Carole Millington 

Muriel Sawbridge 

David Stoker 

APOLOGIES: 

Ronald Lane 

Beryl McDougall 

Scott Parker (Education and Welfare Officer, Durham Student Union) 

Maureen Rillands 

1. Welcome 

Gillian welcomed the following to their first meeting of the Group: 

 

 

 

Mr Robert Feasey, patient representative; 

Dr David Stoker, patient representative; 

Mr Clive Beddoes, patient represnentative. 

2. Membership of Patient Participation Group and “Virtual” Patient 

Reference Group 

Gillian confirmed that the Patient Participation Group currently had sixteen 

members - an increase of three members since the last meeting. 

She also confirmed that the membership of the practice‟s “virtual” patient reference 

group had increased since the last meeting from five members to fourteen. She 

23

indicated that approximately half of this number were students, and considered 

that this was encouraging as a means of engaging with this particular population 

group. She reported that the practice currently had 26,000 registered patients, of 

whom approximately 50% are students. It was important, therefore, that the 

practice received feedback from patients representing this large group of 

registered patients. 

3. Notes of last meeting 

The notes of the last meeting were agreed. 

4. Matters arising 

4.1 Update on practice transfer to Web-based Clinical System 

Gillian reported that the practice‟s planned transfer to EMISWeb had again 

been delayed a further six months from June to December, 2012. This was 

due to a combination of factors including: 

 

 

 

the number of unresolved problems still being experienced by 

practices who had recently transferred to this system; 

the slowness of the current system; 

the need for practices to change their practice systems to 

accommodate the nuances of the system. 

The practice was keen for the above problems to be resolved by EMIS 

before transfer. 

In addition, the PCT had indicated that they were unable to support the 

practice‟s transfer to EMISWeb in June, 2012, due to the number of other 

practices transferring at that time. It was noted that the practice only had 

two windows of opportunity to transfer each year i.e. when the University 

students were on vacation. It had, therefore, been agreed to delay transfer 

until December, 2012, at a time when the PCT IT Dept. would be able to 

support the practice in its transfer. 

It was noted that the new web-based system would provide access to 

electronic facilities such as booking appointments on-line and ordering 

repeat prescriptions on-line. Until the practice transferred onto a web based 

system, however, it was unable to offer these electronic facilities. . 

4.2 GPSI (GP with a Special Interest) Dermatology Service 

Robin Harris enquired whether the planned GPSI Dermatology Service to 

be provided from Cestria Health Centre in Chester le Street was now 

available. Gillian confirmed that the service was established in December, 

2011, and that the practice had already referred patients into the service. 

Marion Holloway confirmed that her husband had chosen to be referred to 

this service and had been extremely impressed. He had been seen by the 

service within a few days and was very pleased with the treatment he had 

received. 

24

Robin Harris enquired whether the practice‟s Salaried GP who had 

expressed an interest in training as a GPSI in Dermatology was still 

interested in providing such a service at Claypath. Gillian indicated that this 

had been discussed with the Salaried GP concerned at her annual review 

and she was still very interesting in pursuing this training. The training, 

however, took a year to complete and the next entry point was not until 

September, 2012. The Salaried GP was, therefore, currently focussing on 

developing other skills e.g. contraception. 

4.3 Public/Patient Engagement in Clinical Commissioning Consortium 

Gillian reported that Juliet Carling, Involvement Officer, Shadow North 

Durham Clinical Commissioning Consortium (CCC), was convening a first 

meeting of the Durham and Chester le Street Locality Patient Participation 

Group. This was to be held on Tuesday, 21 February, 2012, at 6.00 p.m., at 

John Snow House. 

Debra Hindson indicated that she was attending this meeting. She was 

particularly interested in ensuring the health needs of minority groups such 

as people with learning disabilities continued to be met. 

Anyone else interested in attending should contact Juliet by e-mail at 

julietcarling@nhs.net or telephone (0191) 37444183. 

4.4 Podiatry Service 

Gillian reported that she continued to pursue the issue of the practice not 

receiving the same level of podiatry provision for its patients since the PCT 

transferred the community contract to one main provider i.e. North Tees and 

Hartlepool Foundation Trust (NTHFT). The main area of concern was in 

relation to diabetic patients with diabetic foot medium to high risk not 

receiving an annual assessment by a podiatrist. This was previously 

provided by Elizabeth Ashcroft when she was employed by the PCT to 

provide podiatry to our practice patients and was not considered by the 

practice as something which their Health Care Assistants should be 

expected to assess. 

Gillian indicated that since the last meeting she had been informed that the 

PCT had considered the issue and NTHFT had indicated that they would be 

willing to provide an additional service either by training members of 

practice staff or providing the service directly. This additional service, 

however, would need to be costed and it had been suggested that either the 

practice or the Clinical Commissioning Consortium would need to pick up 

the cost. 

Gillian commented that she had informed the PCT that the practice had 215 

diabetics with medium to high risk diabetic foot who required an annual 

diabetic foot assessment by a podiatrist. She indicated that the practice did 

not regard this as an “additional service”. The PCT had previously 

commissioned this service through Elizabeth Ashcroft and as the practice 

had been assured that it would continue to receive the same level of service 

25

provision for its patients it should be included in the current contract with 

NTHFT. In relation to payment, this was not something which the practice 

regarded as its responsibility to pick up the cost. 

Dr Kent indicated that Gillian had continued to press the PCT on this issue 

for over two years - it was, however, extremely difficult to get anyone at the 

PCT to take responsibility for contracting issues hence the length of time 

this particular issue had taken. He assured the meeting that Gillian would 

continue to pursue the issue. 

Marion Holloway indicated that she had not received an appointment from 

the podiatry service for her diabetic foot annual assessment. She 

questioned whether she would need to travel to Hartlepool for this 

assessment 

Dr Kent confirmed that although the service was provided by North Tees 

and Hartlepool Foundation Trust they provided a service to our practice 

patients from Kepier Clinic on Gilesgate. A number of patients had 

expressed difficulty in contacting the service to enquire about appointments 

and the practice had, therefore, displayed a notice in practice waiting areas 

indicating how the Podiatry Administrative Team could be contacted. Marion 

was advised to contact the service to enquire about her appointment. 

Carole Millington asked if the practice had ascertained when the current 

podiatry contract was up for renewal. Gillian agreed to obtain this 

information. In addition, Marion Holloway enquired whether Kath Currie, 

Lay member of the locality Clinical Commissioning Group had been advised 

of this outstanding contractual issue. Gillian indicated that she had advised 

her of the problems the practice was experiencing, but would contact her 

again to see if she could help. 

4.5 Pathfinder Project: Nursing Home Beds 

Gillian reminded the group that the locality had agreed to be an earlyadopter 

of the new GP Commissioning arrangements and signed up to 

“Pathfinder” status. All “Pathfinders” had to develop a project and Durham 

and Chester le Street had, therefore, submitted a proposal aiming to reduce 

unnecessary emergency admissions to hospital for patients >65yrs by 

temporarily (up to 14 days) looking after them in local nursing homes with 

GP support. 

The overall aims of the project were: 

 

 

 

 

 

To increase short stay admissions in nursing homes; 

To reduce the number of admissions to secondary care; 

To improve patient experience; 

To provide continuity of care. 

To provide care closer to patient‟s home. 

Six Nursing Homes across Durham and Chester le Street had successfully 

met the evaluation criteria to become part of the pilot. Muriel Sawbridge 

26

asked if the criteria for selecting nursing homes could be made available. 

Gillian agreed to obtain this. 

Gillian indicated that the pilot was being audited and written up for 

publication. A short article on the success of the pilot was also being 

prepared for the local press. To-date the pilot proposal had proved to be 

very beneficial and patient satisfaction had been extremely high. A 

particular benefit was that patients were being discharged from the nursing 

homes with increased packages of care. 

The meeting asked whether the project was generating savings. Gillian 

commented that the practice had referred two patients into the project in 

December, 2011. One had stayed twelve days, the other had stayed for 

three days. She had calculated that by referring these patients to a nursing 

home rather than secondary care approximately £8.5k of savings had been 

generated. 

It was noted that this was one of the first changes in service delivery that the 

locality Clinical Commissioning Group had achieved, and demonstrated how 

GP clinical input could be beneficial in influencing future service provision 

and commissioning intentions. The project had been agreed to continue 

into 2012/13. 

5. Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey, Claypath Medical Centre 

The meeting had received a copy of the results of the Annual Patient Satisfaction 

Survey at the Claypath Medical Centre, undertaken in January/February, 2012. 

Tracy Watson was commended for the survey analysis presentation and report 

layout. She considered it would be useful to compare the survey results with 

those of the previous year and agreed to do this. 

David Stoker commented that the survey results demonstrated that practice 

achievement was outstanding in most areas and the practice was to be 

congratulated for this achievement. He suggested that the meeting focus on the 

two questions which had received the least satisfaction i.e. the ease of making, 

and awareness of arrangements for booking, appointments with a doctor. 

In relation to increasing patient awareness regarding booking appointments, it was 

acknowledged that reception staff are generally too busy to provide patient 

education on the telephone. Clive Beddoes, therefore, suggested that practice 

leaflets on arrangements for booking appointments be handed out at the reception 

desk to patients arriving for appointments. It was agreed that this was a good idea 

and that different leaflets could also be handed out on a rotational basis for a 

period of say two weeks e.g. Extended Hours; Repeat Prescriptions; etc. 

Gillian commented that she had reviewed with Tracy the suggestions for practice 

improvements, as well as the positive/negative comments on the services provided 

by the practice, which patients had added to the survey questionnaires. A number 

27

of comments had been made in relation to the upkeep of the surgery, and it was 

agreed that the surgery required refurbishment. 

Gillian agreed to seek an annual budget from the Partners in order to refresh the 

surgery environment. It was also agreed to seek PCT Infection Control advice in 

relation to magazines, etc., being made available in waiting areas; and to review 

car parking arrangements particularly for wheelchair users. 

Clive Beddoes enquired whether the practice provided a “Well Man Clinic”. 

Tracy commented that in order to provide flexibility of appointment times the 

practice no longer had a defined “Well Man Clinic” but patients could request a 

“Well Man Health Check” and an appointment time would be arranged. In addition, 

the practice offered NHS Health Checks to all patients over 40 years. Debra 

Hindson enquired how many patients with learning disabilities had requested 

health checks. Tracy agreed to find out. 

6. Development of Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction 

Action Plan 

Gillian tabled a draft Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction Action Plan for 

2012/13, in response to the results from the above survey (see item 5 above). 

The meeting reviewed the above draft and made a number of amendments and 

additions to the plan. Gillian agreed to distribute the revised draft for members 

approval with the notes of the meeting. The final version of the plan would then be 

subject to quarterly review by the Group. 

7. Monitoring of Annual Patient Satisfaction Action Plan - University 

Health Centre 

The meeting had received the final version of the University Health Centre Action 

Plan for 2011/12. This included a final column indicating progress made against 

each action point. 

It was agreed to defer discussion on plan as there was no representation from 

Durham Student Union (DSU). 

8. Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey Questionnaire 2012, University 


Gillian tabled a copy of the draft questionnaire for the University Health Centre, 

Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey which was due to take place in June, 2012. 

It was noted that this was a different survey questionnaire than used at the 

Claypath Medical Centre due to the practice population using the UHC being 

predominantly students. The survey questionnaire, therefore, included a number of 

questions about services which students particularly used e.g. Open Surgeries, 

contraception, travel health, etc. 

28

The meeting agreed to keep the same set of survey questions as last year so that 

a direct comparison could be made with the results of this year compared with 

previous years. It was agreed, however, to delete reference to Extended Hours 

service provision at the CMC as this was not a service which most people 

attending the UHC used. 

It was also agreed that the survey should take place in June, 2012, just before the 

end of the University academic year - a survey any earlier in the academic year ran 

the risk of including patients who had not previously attended the Health Centre 

and, therefore, had no experience of UHC service provision. 

9. Update on development of North Durham Clinical Commissioning 

Consortium 

Gillian commented that in the County Durham and Darlington PCT area there were 

three Shadow Clinical Commissioning Boards, namely: 

a) North Durham Clinical Commissioning Consortium - combining the localities 

of Durham and Chester le Street and Derwentside; 

b) Dales, Easington + Sedgefield CCG - combining the three localities 

mentioned; and 

c) Darlington Clinical Commissioning Consortium. 

Both Durham and Chester le Street (D+CLS) and Derwentside localities were very 

keen to retain their locality focus and were to have two separate Locality 

Executive/Steering Groups. 

D+CLS Locality Executive Group was chaired by Dr Neil O‟Brien, from Cestria 

Health Centre, Chester le Street. The Executive Group also included a GP Vice 

Chair, and 3 other GPs including Dr Jan Panke (Claypath). Gillian was also on the 

Group as one of the four Practice Manager members. A Nurse Practitioner and lay 

person were also members of the Executive. Both Gillian and Dr Panke were 

committing one session per week to the Consortium. 

Derwentside Locality Executive Group was chaired by Dr Kate Bidwell, GP in 

Derwentside. Dr Kate Bidwell had also agreed to become the GP Chair of the 

North Durham Clinical Commissioning Consortium. 

As well as a number of locality groups having been established, there were also 

areas where both localities had agreed to work collaboratively. Gillian was a 

member of the North Durham Strategy, Planning and Organisational Development 

Group, and Dr Panke was a member of the North Durham Finance and 

Performance Group. 

The focus of both localities was working on development of governance 

arrangements, planning cycles, agreeing services to be commissioned e.g. 

Contractor Services Unit support; Medicines Management; etc. 

The meeting then embarked on a general discussion on the proposed NHS 

Reforms in which a number of concerns and differing views were expressed. 

29

Issues raised included the conflicting roles of GPs in commissioning and providing 

services; opening up the market to private providers; protecting the interests of 

vulnerable patient groups; budget management - particularly for continuing health 

care; governance and probity arrangements. 

10. Car parking 

It was agreed that the practice was very fortunate to have some car parking for 

patients, albeit limited, given that many city-centre practices had no car parking 

available either for patients or staff. 

The practice was asked to review the use of the carpark at the Claypath Medical 

Centre, taking the interests of disabled patients, wheelchair users, other patients 

and staff into account. 

11. Date of next meeting 

To be determined. 

/GPB 

17 February, 2012 

30

APPENDIX 6 



Notes of the meeting held on Thursday, 29 th November, 2012, at 6.00 p.m., 


PRESENT: 



Tracy Watson (Deputy General Manager) 

Clive Beddoes 

Robert Feasey 

Barbara Fox 

Ron Lane 


Carole Reeves 


Kathleen Wood 

APOLOGIES: 

Karen Bruce 

Janet Gill 

Jack Gill 

Debra Hindson 


Ronald Lane 


Jenny James (Education and Welfare Officer, Durham Student Union) 

Maureen Rillands 

David Stoker 

1. Welcome 


 

Mrs Carole Reeves, patient representative. 



Gillian confirmed that the Patient Participation Group currently had eighteen 

members - an increase of one member since the last meeting (see above). 

She also confirmed that the membership of the practice‟s “virtual” Patient 

Reference Group had increased since the last meeting from thirty-five members to 

31

fifty-two, half of whom were in the age range 18-30yrs, which was the age range 

the practice found most difficult to engage with despite its considerable student 

population. She reported that the practice currently had 25,000 registered 

patients, of whom approximately 50% were students. It was important, therefore, 

that the practice received feedback from patients representing this large group of 

registered patients. 

It was noted that Gillian had contacted Durham Student Union to seek 

representation on the group and Jenny James, Education and Welfare Officer, 

DSU, had agreed to join. She was unfortunately unable to attend today‟s meeting, 

however, Dr Andrew Kent and Gillian were meeting with her on Monday, 3 rd 

December, 2012. She had already been helpful to the practice in assisting in 

sending out an e-mail reminder to all students regarding the need for those at risk 

to arrange to have the flu vaccine. 

The practice was still seeking a postgraduate representative to join the Group. 





Gillian reported that the practice had been due to transfer to a new web-based 

Clinical Information System (EMISWeb) on 13 December, 2012. Regrettably this 

had again been postponed. This decision had been informed by the experience of 

practices in the locality who had already transferred. Their experience indicated 

that it could take up to four/five minutes for patient records to open during patient 

consultations. The practice had, therefore, agreed to defer transfer until these 

performance issues had been rectified. 

Gillian indicated that the practice only had two windows of opportunity to transfer 

each year i.e. when the University students were on vacation. It had, therefore, 

been agreed to postpone transfer until June or December, 2013. 

It was noted, because of the continued delay in transferring to the new web-based 

system, the practice intended to start to provide access to electronic facilities such 

as booking appointments on-line and ordering repeat prescriptions on-line using its 

current information system early next year. 


Gillian reported that the practice had today received a copy of the service 

specification for core podiatry services. This did not include provision for diabetic 

annual assessments. The practice would read the specification in detail and report 

any issues of concern via the new Safeguarding Reporting system which the 

Clinical Commissioning Group was promoting as a tool for practices to report 

32

commissioning concerns and issues, etc. Practice staff were to receive training on 

this tool next week. 

The meeting expressed their concern that the additional provision the practice had 

managed to acquire this year for annual assessments for diabetics with medium to 

high risk feet was due to come to an end on 31 st March, 2013. Gillian confirmed 

that this would be one of the first issues the practice reported once trained on the 

new Safeguarding Reporting system. 

Carole Reeves indicated that she had not received a diabetic foot assessment over 

the course of the last three years. Tracy Watson indicated that this was surprising 

as the practice provided foot assessments in all diabetic annual reviews. These 

were undertaken by practice HCAs. The additional provision the practice had 

acquired this year was for the assessment of diabetics with medium to high risk 

feet. It was agreed to ensure Carole was offered a diabetic foot assessment. 

4.5 Pathfinder Project : Nursing Home Beds 

It was noted that this pilot had now been extended to 31 st March, 2013. 

4.6 Car parking at Claypath Medical Centre 

Gillian commented that David Stoker had approached the Council regarding the 

possibility of providing disabled car parking bays on the road outside the practice. 

A site visit had been arranged and a couple of options shared with the practice on 

which David was now seeking Council approval. 

The meeting conveyed their thanks to David for pursing this important issue on 

behalf of the practice. 

5. University Health Centre Patient Satisfaction Survey (June, 2012) 

5.1 Agreement of UHC Action Plan 2012/13 

At the last meeting the results of the UHC Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey were 

reviewed and a number of suggestions for inclusion in an action plan developed. A 

draft action plan had subsequently been circulated to the Group for their comment. 

The meeting was now asked to note the content of the final action plan and to 

approve its content. 

After discussion, the action plan was agreed, which the Group would now monitor 

for progress. 

5.2 Monitoring of UHC Action Plan 2012/13 

The meeting reviewed progress against the actions identified in the above plan. 

Progress is now noted in the final column of the plan headed “Monitoring, 

November, 2012” (see attached). It was noted that the action plan included 19 

action points of which 9 had already been achieved. 

33

6. Monitoring of CMC Action Plan 2012/13 

The meeting received a copy of the above plan which included a column headed 

“Monitoring, November, 2012” showing progress to-date against each action point 

(see attached). It was noted that only five action points were still to be achieved out 

of a total of 23 action points and two of these were not due to be started until 

January, 2013. These included: 

To identify a 2wks period to hand out leaflets from reception on how to book 

appointments; 

To repeat the above process with a different practice leaflet; 

To pilot booking appts on-line (January, 2013); 

To pilot ordering repeat prescriptions on-line (January, 2013); 

To review location of practice information throughout practice 

It was agreed that good progress had been made in achieving the agreed actions 

in the CMC Action Plan for 2012/13. 

7. Draft Questionnaire for Claypath Medical Centre Annual Patient 

Satisfaction Survey – January, 2013 

The meeting received a copy of the Patient Survey Questionnaire used 

in the Claypath Medical Centre Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey in 

January, 2012. The meeting was asked to review the questionnaire and to 

consider whether it wished to use the same set of questionnaires in the 

survey in January, 2013. 

The meeting agreed it was useful to use the same set of questions each year 

in order to measure whether there had been any change in satisfaction from 

year to year. It was also agreed that it was beneficial to keep the survey to 

two sides of A4. It was suggested an additional question be added to the 

survey in January, 2013, to ask patients whether they were aware of the 111 

service. 

8. Extension to Extended Hours provision from November, 2012, to end 

February, 2013 

It was noted that the practice had agreed to provide additional extended hours 

provision from November, 2012, to end February, 2013, in order to reduce the 

pressure on hospital services throughout the winter. The service was to be 

provided from the University Health Centre each Saturday from 8.00 a.m. - 

5.00 p.m. throughout this period and as with all extended hours provision was 

supported by reception staff but was without telephone cover or secretarial 

support. The appointments are with a doctor and are pre-bookable. Take-up 

to-date had been good with surgeries being fully booked. 

It was confirmed that the Saturday extended hours provided additional 

34

appointments for practice patients and that there was no reduction in the 

number of appointments for patients at other times during the week. 

It was noted that the 111 service would if appropriate refer patients back to 

practice during these extended opening hours thus reducing workload on 

hospital services. The 111 service could contact the University Health 

Centre by a direct telephone line during this time to advise on cases they 

were referring back to the practice. 

The meeting considered the additional provision was excellent and applauded 

the practice for its flexibility in being able to offer patients these extra hours. 

Concern was expressed, however, that patients would get used to provision 

being provided during these additional hours and would be dissatisfied when 

they were withdrawn in March, 2013. 

8. Patient Bequest/Donations Fund – Ideas for expenditure 

Gillian had written out to all members of the Patient Participation Group as 

well as the “virtual” Patient Reference Group asking them for ideas for 

expenditure against the Patient Bequest/Donations Fund. The fund was to be 

used for the direct benefit of practice patients, on facilities falling outside those 

reasonably expected to be provided by the practice or Primary Care Trust/Clinical 

Commissioning Group. 

Ideas which had been generated to-date included: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Water dispensers in waiting areas at CMC; 

Liners for cuffs for 24hr BP monitor machines; 

Refurbishing of seat covers in waiting areas at CMC; 

New pictures, photos, or paintings for the waiting areas; 

Live plants/foliage in waiting areas; 

Fish tank in waiting area of CMC. 

The meeting endorsed the proposal for water dispensers at CMC. They are 

considered that the proposal for pictures/photographs to be displayed in 

corridors and waiting areas was a good idea - particularly old photographs of 

the local area. They also suggested that “Thank You” cards to the practice 

should be put on display. 

Miss Barbara Fox drew attention to a leaflet on “Poetry for the Waiting Room” 

which she had picked-up in the University Health Centre and suggested the 

practice should subscribe to this publication and copies be made available 

for patients at both sites. Dr Kent indicated that he had more copies of the 

leaflet and agreed to put these out at the Claypath Medical Centre. 

The meeting did not endorse the suggestion of “live plants/foliage” in waiting 

areas as it was considered some patients may be allergic to plants. 

Gillian agreed to put the meetings suggestions to the small practice group 

considering how the fund should be used. 

35

9. North Durham Clinical Commissioning Group 

9.1 Patients’ Reference Group 

Carole Millington fed back from the North Durham Clinical Commissioning 

Group‟s (NDCCG) Patient Reference Group of which she was currently Chair. 

The group met monthly and was made up of patient representatives from most of 

the general practices across Durham and Darlington. She indicated that the Group 

aimed to provide feedback from practice Patient Participation Groups to the 

Clinical Commissioning Group and vice versa. The meetings had regular 

speakers,which had included to-date Dr Kate Bidwell, Chair of the NDCCG, 

NDCCG Locality Administrators, and Verna Fee, Lay Member of the NDCCG 

whose role included responsibility for Patient and Public Involvement and being on 

the Quality and Innovation Research Group of the Governing Body. 

Carole indicated that the group was becoming active and vocal and regularly 

fed-back issues from Patient Participation Groups to the CCG. Issues which 

they had fed-back included: 

 

 

withdrawal of hearing aid batteries from surgeries (Tracy Watson indicated 

that our practice patients obtained these from UHND, and until recently 

Gilesgate Clinic - the practice had never provided these); 

Inconsistent supplies of prescription drugs at pharmacies (Dr Kent indicated 

that this was an ongoing issue based on the pharmacy contract and if the 

medication was prescribed by the proprietary name it would be more 

expensive. It was considered, however, that pharmacies needed to make it 

clearer to patients if changes in the brand of medication effected the 

appearance of patients‟ medication. 

Carole also indicated that the Group was an useful forum in which to gain 

an understanding of the ongoing changes in NHS commissioning and its 

structures. It was also useful to learn of the activities of other Patient 

Participation Groups, a number of which were extremely active in fund raising 

for their practices, undertaking patient surveys, etc. 

It was agreed that the Patient Reference Group would be a standing item on 

the Patient Participation Group agenda for feedback to the Group. 

9.2 General NDCCG update 

Gillian reported that the Shadow North Durham Clinical Commissioning Group 

was working towards authorisation. This involved demonstrating whether it 

was considered capable of taking on the commissioning function previously 

undertaken by the PCT. A “mock” authorisation visit had been undertaken 

last week led by Price Waterhouse Cooper, Auditors, and this had gone well. 

The official authorisation visit was to take place on 21 st December, 2012. 

The Shadow NDCCG now had an agreed constitution and structure, and 

36

appointments had been made to the Board. The majority of CCG managerial 

posts, however, had still to be appointed. 

Gillian commented that she had mentioned last time that the CCG was to 

develop three localities/constituencies - Durham, Chester-le-Street, and 

Derwentside. Each constituency was to have a Lead GP and a Deputy GP, 

as well as a Lead PM and a Deputy PM who were to be funded a number of 

sessions each week to undertake these roles. Gillian indicated that the 

following appointments had been identified in the Durham Constituency: 

Durham Lead GP 

Durham Deputy Lead GP 

- Dr David Smart 

- Dr Jan Panke (from our practice) 

Durham Lead Practice Manager - Maureen Kersley 

Durham Deputy Lead Practice Manager - Gillian Bevan (from our practice) 

It was noted that Dr Panke was undertaking 1.5 sessions per week on 

CCG related work and that his time out of the practice had been replaced by 

a salaried doctor. 

Gillian indicated that she had recently added the Shadow Board of the 

NDCCG deputising for Maureen Kersley. She indicated that the agenda was 

very similar to that of the PCT in that items and discussion focussed on 

quality and performance issues, as well as finance. 

Gillian commented that the GP Leads and Deputies were visiting each 

practice in their constituency to share how they were going to approach 

their roles in acting as a conduit for information sharing and flow between 

practices and the CCG and vice versa. They were currently collating 

commissioning concerns/issues from each practice to collate, identify areas of 

commonality, and share with the CCG. Gillian tabled a paper summarising 

the issues which had been identified at these visits. She also tabled a copy 

of the NDCCG‟s Clear and Credible Plan 2012/13 - 2016/17 which set out 

how the CCG proposed to work over the next four/five years. Members of the 

Group were invited to read the Plan and let Gillian have any comments on the 

Proposed commissioning intentions. 

9.3 Identification of commissioning concerns 

As indicated above, Gillian tabled a paper summarising the commissioning 

concerns/issues identified to-date from practices across the Durham 

Constituency. She asked the Group to review the issues raised and let her 

know: 

 

 

whether they agreed with the issues raised; 

whether they had any other comments, concerns or ideas regarding the 

commissioning of services. 

She would then ensure that any issues identified by members of the practice 

37

Patient Participation Group were fed back to the CCG via the North Durham 

Constituency. 

Gillian indicated she was also asking patients on the practice “virtual” Patient 

Reference Group to identify any issues. 

Carole Reeves indicated that she was concerned that commissioning services 

from other providers might adversely affect NHS provision. Muriel Sawbridge 

voiced the same concern and asked whether providers of NHS services such 

as hospitals were represented on the Clinical Commissioning Group. Gillian 

indicated that all Clinical Commissioning Group Boards were to have a 

secondary care clinician on the Board but that this representative could not be 

an employee of a local provider organisation. 

Concern was also expressed that small or independent providers would be at a 

disadvantage when it came to submitting bids to provide services in what appeared 

to be an extremely bureaucratic bidding process. 


It was agreed that the next meeting would take place on Thursday, 

14 February, 2013, at 6.00 p.m., at the University Health Centre. The main item on 

the agenda at this meeting would be to review the results from the Claypath 

Medical Centre Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey undertaken in January, 2013. 

/GPB 

3 December, 2012 

(ENCS x 2) 

38

APPENDIX 7 

Claypath & University Medical Group 

RESPONSE RATE: 

University Health Centre 

Annual Patient Survey 

June, 2012 

 

 

250 Questionnaires distributed in surgery. 

(176 returned. Response rate = 70.4%) 

28 Questionnaires sent to On-line Patient Reference Group. 

(8 returned. Response rate = 28.6%) 

Overall number of questionnaires sent out: 278 

Overall number of returned questionnaires: 184 

Overall response rate: 66.19% 

……………………………………………………………………………………………… 

…. 

Qu 1 : How satisfied are you with the services provided at reception 

Of the 184 returned questionnaires, the outcome was: 

Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

Very satisfied 70 38.0% 

Satisfied 89 48.4% 

Neither satisfied or dissatisfied 20 11.0% 

Dissatisfied 4 2.2% 

Very dissatisfied 1 0.4% 

39

11.0% 2.2% 

0.4% 

38.0% 

Very Satisfied 

Satisfied 

Neither Satisfied nor 

Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

48.4% 

Very Dissatisfied 

40

Qu 2 : The efficiency and friendliness of the staff 

Of the 184 returned questionnaires, 1 (0.5%) did not respond to this question. Of 

the remaining 183 responses, the outcome was: 

Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 






12.6% 

3.3% 

1.1% 

33.3% 


Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

49.7% 


41

Qu 3 : The ease of making an appointment to see a doctor 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 






Not applicable 1 0.5% 

21.3% 

10.3% 

4.4% 

0.5% 

29.5% 


Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

34.0% 


Not Applicable 

42

Qu 4: The standard of the patient environment within the Health Centre 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 






15.3% 

3.8% 

1.1% 


31.2% 

Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

48.6% 


43

CLINICAL 

Qu 5 : The standard of care provided by the nurses 

Of the 184 returned questionnaires, 20 (10.9%) did not respond to this question. 

Of the remaining 164 responses, the outcome was: 

Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 







7.9% 

1.8% 

3.7% 

4.3% 

50.0% 


Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

32.3% 



44

Qu 6 : The standard of care provided by the doctors 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 







9.1% 

2.8% 

2.3% 

1.1% 


Satisfied 

33.6% 

51.1% 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 



45

Qu 7 : Open Surgery service 

Of the 184 returned questionnaires, 11 (6%) did not respond to this question. 


Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 







2.3% Very Satisfied 

26.0% 

6.9% 1.2% 

29.5% 

Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

34.1% 



46

Qu 8 : Do you have any ideas how we can improve Open Surgery 

Of the 184 returned questionnaires, the outcome was: 

Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

YES 41 22.3% 

NO 142 77.2% 


See responses below: 

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING OPEN SURGERY: 

WAITING TIME 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Try and reduce the waiting times 

Unfortunately its probably nothing you can do much about - waiting 

times tend to be long due to number of people attending Open Surgery 

Advertise the wait time 

Estimated waiting time 

Less waiting time 

Shorter waiting time 

Waiting times can be very long. Maybe sign saying average length of 

wait. Have missed many lectures as wait long - if I knew this would be 

the case could have come back another day 

Make it less busy 

BOOKING APPOINTMENTS 

 

 

 

Make it easier to book appointments 

More appointment slots 

Easier to make appointments rather than being told to come to Open 

Surgery 

ADDITIONAL OPENING HOURS 

 

Have a better variety of opening hours 

47

Longer opening hours 

Longer Open Surgery hours 

Longer hours 

More hours 

Longer hours maybe 3hrs - start more promptly 

Open for longer - earlier on a Wednesday - gets very busy! 

Need longer hours or two drop-in slots per day - it always takes ages 

to be seen 

Have drop in Doctors available at any time during opening hours 

More sessions as the queues can get extremely long 

ACCESS TO APPOINTMENTS 

 

 

 

 

Sometimes it is difficult if you have lectures - maybe more in the 

afternoon, or one day with appointments 

Maybe do more afternoons 

Some afternoon Open Surgery 

Should have more Nurse appointments too 

STAFFING 

 

 

 

Expand capacity if possible 

Reception staff could be friendlier and more doctors appts need to be 

easier to access - Open Surgery waiting times are ridiculous 

Increase number of nurses that deal with contraception 

ENVIRONMENT 

 

 

 

Larger waiting area/magazines or entertainment 

Turn up volume of announcer as often difficult to hear names 

Its just too small for so many students - Open Surgery can take so long 

as to be a nightmare 

48

It is often a bit awkward having to say what you are at the doctors for in 

front of a room full of patients 

REPEAT PRESCRIPTIONS 

 

If you literally have to go and get a renewed prescription, there should 

be a quicker way of doing this. I had to wait almost two hours and it 

took 10 seconds - maybe a doctor just dealing with quick admin things 

A separate queue for admin appointments 

OTHER 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Only problems is the waiting time, which I suppose can only be 

improved by moving more ailments out of Open Surgery or increasing 

staff numbers 

Time estimates to be seen 

Grade by urgency 

Better time organisation 

Make it clearer exactly what the Open Surgery hours are 

Quicker 

I do not think any improvement could be made - excellent, doctors - 

nurses and staff at all times 

49

Qu 9 : Are you aware that nurses should be consulted for contraception 

and travel health advice 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

YES 161 91.0% 

NO 15 8.5% 


8.5% 0.5% 

Yes 

No 


91.0% 

50

OPENING HOURS 

Qu 10 : How satisfied are you with our opening hours 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 






17.0% 

8.8% 1.6% 

22.5% 


Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

50.1% 


51

Qu 11: Were you aware of the practice’s extended opening hours for prebooked 

appointments only 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

YES 42 23.0% 

NO 140 76.5% 


0.5% 

23.0% 

Yes 

No 


76.5% 

52

ADMINISTRATION 

Qu 12 : If you have required evidence for mitigating circumstances on 

another University matter (yellow form system) how satisfied 

were you with the response you have received from the Health 

Centre 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 








14.6% 

6.1% 

4.0% 

0.5% 

Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

72.6% 

2.2% 



53

Qu 13 : Were you aware of the practice website 

www.claypathdoctors.co.uk and/or specific address for students 

at www.durhamstudenthealth.co.uk 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

YES 120 67.0% 

NO 59 33.0% 

33.0% 

67.0% 

Yes 

No 

54

TRAVEL HEALTH 

Qu 14 : Are you aware that we have a travel health clinic which can 

provide all vaccinations, including Yellow Fever vaccination 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

YES 103 57.0% 

NO 78 43.0% 

43.0% 

57.0% 

Yes 

No 

55

MENTAL HEALTH 

Qu 15 If you have experienced mental health problems, how satisfied 

were you with the health services provided outside the practice 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 








5.0% 5.0% 4.5% 

2.3% 

1.2% 

Satisfied 


Dissatisfied 

Dissatisfied 

82.0% 



56


Qu 16 Would you recommend the University Health Centre to a friend 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

YES 165 93.0% 

NO 12 7.0% 

7.0% 

Yes 

No 

93.0% 

57

Qu 17 How would you rate the University Health Centre against your GP 

surgery at home, indicating whether you feel it is: 



Number of 

respondents 

% of 

respondents 

Much better 20 11.2% 

Better 28 15.6% 

About the same 86 48.0% 

Worse 29 16.2% 

Much worse 3 1.7% 


16.2% 

1.7% 7.3% 

48.0% 

11.2% 

15.6% 

Much Better 

Better 

About the Same 

Worse 

Much Worse 


Please share with us your thoughts about the service we provide, both 

positive and negative, including things perhaps that we should stop 

doing and things that you would wish us to do that we do not do at 

present: 

(See comments listed on following pages) 

58

COMMENTS RECEIVED 

Test results: 

Negative 

 

Haven‟t been very efficient about faxing blood test results - and my 

doctor requested for me to have my blood test results myself but this 

has been very difficult to arrange. 

Booking appointments: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Would be great to have online appointments and also the ability to 

request repeat prescriptions online 

An on-line system to book and cancel appointments. 

Appointments have not always been made available two weeks in 

advance, as is stated on the website. This has made it very difficult to 

make appointments at times. 

Good service in general. Sometimes appointments have to be booked 

a while in advance but Open Surgery and emergency contact is 

available which is good. 

Have occasionally been told over the phone to attend Open Surgery 

rather than being given an appointment later on in the week, which I 

would prefer. This has been rare though 

I find it easy to book appointments and was particularly impressed with 

the level of care provided by the physiotherapist. I have very little to 

complain about and I commend the Centre for that bearing in mind how 

much I have used it during my time at University 

It takes pre-ringing in a lot of time in advance to get an appointment. 

I can never get an appointment when I need one! And doing a degree 

that has lots of contact hours means I can‟t attend Open Surgery. 

The Open Surgery is very useful but getting appointments outside 

these times is very difficult 

Should be able to get an appointment for the same/next day. Open 

Surgery times not always convenient 

A real problem is that you can only book appointments two weeks in 

advance - I know when all my appointments are needed but often by 

the time I‟ve rung (within the two weeks) there‟s been no appointment 

59

free with the correct data. I think people who have a long term 

illness/problem should be able to book a set of appts at the beginning 

of term to make sure they get them with the correct doctor/correct 

dates 

Repeat Prescriptions 

 

 

 

Would be great to have online appointments and also the ability to 

request repeat prescriptions online 

Would like easier repeat prescription making (instructions for an online 

repeat prescription) 

Repeat prescription services with Boots Market Place. 

Travel Clinic 

I recently had to get a medical form completed for working in China - 

the form is a bureaucratic waste of time required by China, but the 

Centre charged £85, although many other GPs have provided what is 

essentially just their signature and a stamp for free. On the other hand, 

the staff were very friendly whilst they did it all! 

Continuity of care: 

 

It is harder to gain access to specific GPs within a reasonable time 

frame than would be ideal 

Open Surgeries: 

 

 

 

I am not sure if you are able to request a specific doctor during Open 

Surgery, but if not then we should be, with the understanding that we 

will have to wait longer. 

Open Surgery feels like we are cattle being herded. 

Its nice that there are plenty of drop-in hours 

Give the form AFTER seeing the doctor. P.S. Open Surgery until 12 

 

 

 

Longer surgery opening hours for drop-in. Maybe morning and 

afternoon. Otherwise very good 

Positive - for minor illnesses quick service. 

The drop-in allows check up on smaller problems that would probably 

60

go unchecked otherwise. 

 

 

 

 

The same because of convenience of access (i.e. 5mins walk). 

However, the UHC is always much busier than my local GPs. 

For the volume of patients the Centre has to deal with, the service 

provided is of a very high standard, however, it sometimes seems 

overloaded. 

Open Surgery appointments should not be rushed, doctors should 

ensure the issue is fully addressed 

Extremely easy to come in during the Open Surgery with a short 

waiting time usually. 

Waiting times: 

 

 

 

 

Sometimes the appointments run quite late towards the end of the day 

which can be inconvenient but otherwise very happy with the service 

I have had to wait over half an hour after my appointment for on more 

than one occasion. Every time I have visited I have had to wait for at 

least 15mins after my appointment was scheduled. 

I have been waiting in the Open Surgery longer than people who have 

arrived after me and this should change 

Waiting times short 

Staffing: 

Negative 

 

I am consistently dismayed with the treatment I receive from the 

reception staff at Green Lane. I am an older postgrad student-- in my 

thirties, with children, and I feel very condescended to whenever 

dealing with the reception staff there. I understand that the staff deal 

with hundreds of undergrad students and that must be tiring and 

frustrating, but it is virtually impossible to make an appointment or ask 

a question because the staff are abrupt and borderline rude. I have 

been hung up on mid sentence when trying to book an appointment 

and my first choice of time wasn't available. I have also had 

experiences attending open surgery where I asked to see a doctor and 

sent to see a practice nurse instead, which then meant I had to go back 

to the waiting room and re-enter the queue to see a doctor. I have 

chronic issues and have to attend the surgery regularly, and I find it to 

be a frustrating and tiring event every single time. I deeply regret not 

registering for the Claypath surgery instead, because I have never had 

61

a bad experience there, and am very disappointed that I no longer have 

the option to make appointments there instead of Green Lane. I 

strongly recommend to any incoming postgrad I know that they should 

NOT register at Green Lane because of the poor service and 

communication of the reception staff. 

 

 

 

Only improvement I can think of is I‟m never sure what a nurse can or 

cannot see and treat 

One male doctor here is very patronising and disbelieving, made for a 

very uncomfortable experience, he did not seem to listen or care. 

Receptionists tones are sometimes unfriendly. 

Positive 

 

 

 

 

 

Some doctors are great, others come across as slightly callous 

Very friendly staff 

Doctors very friendly 

Drs Flanagan and Walling are very understanding. Getting registered 

was not a problem. 

Doctors and nurses really friendly. 

Service satisfaction: 

Positive: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excellent service provided, doctors and nurses who genuinely listen 

and take an interest in order to help. Very approachable. 

All good 

I am very happy - the surgery caters fantastically for students. 

I‟ve only been here for about 5mins but for somebody who usually 

dislikes visits to the doctor, everything has been painless and easy 

Very helpful, especially over/around exams 

Very professional, easy to access services 

I think it is great 

It is great 

62

I have found over the last seven years that anything I ever need has 

been available and has been dealt with in an expedient manner. All of 

the doctors and staff are very approachable and nothing is too much 

trouble for them even when dealing with a huge number of students. I 

would never move out of this area as I have never had such a good GP 

surgery. 

Overall I have been very happy with the service 

Overall, am happy with surgery, normally on time and staff are helpful 

Positive - provision of physio. 

A very efficient, quick and helpful service with short waiting times and 

plenty of open surgery hours. 

Good, satisfied. Often busy and had to book appointment soon 

I think the service is very useful for the student community. Location 

useful and staff friendly. 

Negative: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not always first come, first served 

Negative - two separate occasions have completely missed serious 

illness/injury, one of which was potentially life-threatening. Seem 

disinclined to listen to a patient. A friend has had the same experience. 

Many people I have spoken to (alumni) have complained that the 

doctors here assign more than most of the symptoms to stress - this 

happened to me and I actually had Glandular Fever! 

Generally pleased but some doctors rush you and make it obvious they 

are busy and try and see you as quickly as possible 

Always +ve experience except once when I came to have stitches 

removed nurse was very rough and angry with me for not having them 

removed earlier but circumstances didn‟t allow me to come sooner. 

Painful to remove and quite a bit of blood, I was a new Fresher and just 

needed some sympathy! 

Service is generally impersonal and notably much more limited than 

that at the Claypath Surgery (e.g. availability of appointments and 

flexibility) and other surgeries I have been at. 

Had problems with referrals to foot clinic in the past. Paper work never 

came through. 

63

Environment: 

 

 

 

Improve decoration in waiting area, perhaps with informative posters. 

Advertise the services provided by the practice better - on posters or 

leaflets or advertise the website more 

I would personally get rid of the radio in the waiting room 

Reception area is VERY uncomfortable to bring in samples, book 

appointments etc within earshot of all patients 

Other: 

 

 

I think it would be a good idea to include the nursing staff on all 

websites of Claypath House. 

Advertise more of the things I wasn‟t aware of. 

[END] 

GPB/25 June, 2012 

64

APPENDIX 8 



Notes of the meeting held on Thursday, 19 th July, 2012, at 6.00 p.m., Conference 

Room, University Health Centre, Green Lane. 

PRESENT: 

Gillian Bevan 

Jan Panke 

Tracy Watson 

Clive Beddoes 

Karen Bruce 

Barbara Fox 

Janet Gill 

Jack Gill 

Robin Harris 

Debra Hindson 

David Stoker 

Kathleen Wood 

(General Manager) (Chair) 

(GP Partner) 

(Deputy General Manager) 

APOLOGIES: 

Robert Feasey 


Ronald Lane 




Dr Andrew Kent 

1. Welcome 


 

 

Mrs Karen Bruce, patient representative; 

Mrs Kathleen Wood, patient representative. 



Gillian confirmed that the Patient Participation Group currently had seventeen 

members. 

She also confirmed that the membership of the practice‟s “virtual” patient reference 

group had increased since the last meeting from fourteen members to 35 - half of 

whom were in the age range 18-30yrs, which was the age range which the practice 

found most difficult to engage with despite its considerable student population. 

65

It was noted that Scott Parker, Education and Welfare Officer, Durham Student 

Union, was again absent from the meeting and had failed to submit his apologies. 

This was particularly disappointing given that the main item on the agenda was to 

discuss the results of the Annual Patient Satisfaction Surgery at the University 

Health Centre. It was agreed that Gillian would pursue this issue to see if she 

could encourage regular representation on the group from Durham Student Union. 

Robin Harris also suggested that as Postgraduates also used the University Health 

Centre, that a postgraduate representative be sought as a member of the Patient 

Participation Group. 





Gillian reported that the practice still planned to transfer to EMSWeb in 

December, 2012. The transfer date was 13 th December, 2012. 

It was noted that the transfer would enable the practice to provide access to 

electronic facilities such as booking appointments on-line and ordering 

repeat prescriptions on-line in early 2013. 

4.8 GPSI (GP with a Special Interest) Dermatology Service 

Gillian reported that the practice had agreed to reimburse the course fees of 

the Salaried GP interested in training as a GPSI in Dermatology from 

September, 2012. Unfortunately, however, the Salaried GP concerned had 

been offered a GP Partnership elsewhere and was leaving the practice in 

August, 2012. No other interest had been expressed within the practice in 

undertaking this training. 


Gillian reported that the notes of the last meeting highlighted the continued 

problems the practice was experiencing in relation to podiatry provision for 

its patients and in particular the lack of annual assessments for diabetics 

with medium to high risk feet. 

Gillian was pleased to report, however, that the PCT had (after a period of 

two and a half years) now agreed to provide this service for 2012/13, and 

the practice was receiving two additional sessions on the second Monday of 

each month at the University Health Centre, for these patients. It was 

noted, however, that the agreement was only until the end of March, 2013, 

and that the practice would, therefore, need to raise this issue again to 

ensure the service continued after this date. The fact that the PCT had 

eventually agreed that the service should be provided, however, should add 

weight to practice negotiations. 

66

Gillian commented that Marion Holloway, a member of the Patient 

Participation Group, had recently been treated by the new service and had 

written to her in praise of the treatment she had received. She had asked 

that Gillian pass on her appreciation of the service to the podiatrist‟s line 

manager - Gillian had done this. 

David Stoker reported that County Durham PCT had recently put the overall 

podiatry service contract out to tender and that the service was open to “Any 

Qualified Provider” (AQP). He commented, however, that the tender 

documentation which was required was a “bureaucratic nightmare” and the 

short timescale given, were factors which would discourage many small 

providers in applying. 

Gillian commented that the recent Podiatry AQP did not include any diabetic 

provision and she was concerned that treatment for diabetic feet was again 

being excluded from both podiatry and diabetes contracts. This was 

unacceptable. 

4.4 Pathfinder Project: Nursing Home Beds 

Gillian reported that the Pathfinder Project which aimed to reduce 

unnecessary emergency admissions to hospital for patients >65yrs by 

temporarily (up to 14 days) looking after them in local nursing homes with 

GP support had been set up as a nine months pilot in August, 2011. Such 

was the success of the pilot that it had now been extended to December, 

2012. 

The Nursing Homes which were included in the Project included: 

 

 

 

 

 

Pelton Grange, Chester le Street 

St Mary‟s Church Chare, Chester le Street 

St Margaret‟s, Durham 

Melbury Court, Durham 

Belmont Grange, Durham 

Each of the above nursing homes had had to demonstrate compliance with 

strict eligibility criteria. Gillian indicated that she had tried to obtain a copy 

of the criteria but had been referred to the North East Procurement Service 

which had led the formal procurement process. 

It was noted that the Project was currently being evaluated but that patients 

were generally very happy with the service offered, which provided care 

closer to home, continuity of care via their GP, and an agreed coordinated 

discharge plan and care package with measures put in place immediately 

on discharge. In addition, the project had demonstrated substantial financial 

savings 


Gillian indicated that the Partnership had reviewed the use of the car 

park at the Claypath Medical Centre, particularly in relation to disabled 

patients and wheelchair users and it had been agreed to reposition the 

67

disabled bays when the car park next required resurfacing/repair. 

David Stoker asked if the practice would like him to approach the 

Council to consider the allocation of some car parking spaces in the 

road outside the practice. The meeting considered this would be 

extremely helpful. 

5. Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey, University Health Centre, 

June, 2012 


Survey at the University Health Centre, undertaken in June, 2012. 

The meeting went through each of the survey results in turn and concluded that 

patients were generally happy with the patient environment, standard of care 

provided by doctors and nurses, but had some concerns regarding making 

appointments to see a doctor and the length of waiting time at Open Surgeries. 

It was acknowledged, however, that access was excellent in comparison with other 

general practices. Dr Panke commented that in an audit of practice patients‟ 

attendance at A&E during general practice opening hours across Durham and 

Chester le Street, our practice stood out as the best having only 2.7 per 1000 

whereas the next best practice rate was 4.5 per 1000. 

It was noted that if patients rang requesting an urgent same day appointment all 

patients would be asked if possible to attend the surgery and arrangements would 

be made for them to be seen by a doctor. Those who were unable to attend the 

surgery would be offered a home visit. 

The meeting discussed the waiting time in Open Surgeries, which Dr Panke 

indicated at worst was up to 1hr which was not considered bad for an appointment 

which had not been booked in advance. It was suggested a whiteboard might be 

useful to indicate the waiting time but concluded that this would be difficult for staff 

to keep regularly updated and would cause confusion for patients waiting to be 

seen by different clinicians. It was agreed that the reception staff would continue 

to advise patients at reception of the likely waiting time, and if patients were 

concerned whilst waiting they should ask. 

It was noted that over 76% of respondents to the survey had indicated that they 

were unaware of the practice‟s extended hours for pre-booked appointments. It 

was considered, however, that this question was not really relevant for students as 

extended hours were targeted at those patients who were unable to attend the 

surgery during normal practice hours e.g. patients who worked, etc. It was agreed 

to delete this question from the UHC survey next year. 

It was agreed that further work was necessary to promote the UHC Travel Health 

Clinic and that reference to availability of Yellow Fever vaccination should remain 

as the survey was a means of promoting this practice facility. 

68

A number of respondents suggested that online appointments and the ability to 

request repeat prescriptions online would be beneficial - the practice hoped to 

implement both in the New Year. One respondent requested the facility to collect 

repeat prescriptions from Boots Pharmacy in the Market Place - it was agreed to 

look into this. 

In terms of the practice environment, one respondent suggested getting rid of the 

radio in the waiting room. A number of patients on the Participation Group 

indicated that they too found the radio annoying but thought that this was to do with 

the positioning of the radio rather than the volume level. It was agreed to look into 

repositioning the radio. 

6. Development of University Health Centre Patient Satisfaction 

Action Plan 

It was agreed that Gillian would develop a draft University Health Centre Patient 

Satisfaction Plan taking account of the above survey results (see item 5 above). 

The Patient Participation Group would then review the draft action plan and made 

any necessary amendments. The final version of the plan would then be subject to 

quarterly review by the Group. 

7. Monitoring of Annual Patient Satisfaction Action Plan, Claypath 

Medical Centre 2012/13 

The meeting received a copy of the above action plan, which included a column 

indicating progress against each action point. Those action points which had not 

been achieved were reviewed. 

In relation to the proposed addition to the practice leaflet to indicate that patients 

who needed to be seen urgently did not need to ring at 8.30 a.m., it was agreed 

that on review this action point was unfeasible. It was agreed, however, that the 

practice would find time to identify a two weeks period to hand out leaflets on how 

to book appointments, etc. 

In relation to the action point to display DNA rates within the practice, it was agreed 

to compare annual DNA rates. 

A number of members of the Group indicated how beneficial they found being able 

to request advice from a doctor over the telephone. 

In relation to reviewing the location of practice information throughout the surgery 

this had been postponed until refurbishment of the Claypath Medical Centre had 

been completed. It was noted that Phase 1 of the refurbishment was to commence 

on 30 th July, 2012, and whilst work was being carried out the practice had sought 

the PCT‟s permission to transfer surgeries to the University Health Centre site. 

Gillian indicated that advice had now been sought from PCT Infection Control 

regarding making magazines, etc., available in practice waiting areas. She 

reported that a limited supply of magazines was to be made available but that toys 

were not to be reintroduced as they required cleaning. 

69

The practice would continue to implement outstanding items in the action plan and 

report on progress at the next meeting of the Group. 

8. Update on development of North Durham Clinical Commissioning 

Consortium 

Gillian reported that since the last meeting the proposed North Durham Clinical 

Commissioning Consortium had reviewed its decision making processes and 

agreed to combine the two Locality Executive Groups (Derwentside and 

Durham/Chester le Street) into one Joint Locality Executive Group. The Joint 

Executive had been meeting since May, 2012. 

Dr Jan Panke and Gillian were both members of this Group. 

A lot of work had also been undertaken to develop governance arrangements and 

to produce a Clear & Credible Plan (setting out objectives over the next five years) 

and a Delivery Plan (setting out what the Consortium planned to deliver in the 

coming year). 

Gillian tabled a diagram setting out the proposed structure of the North Durham 

Clinical Commissioning Consortium. This showed how each of the 31 general 

practices in Derwentside, Durham, and Chester le Street would be represented on 

a Council of Members which would meet annually. It was also proposed to 

develop a GP Constituency in each of the three localities which would be led by a 

GP Constituency Lead employed by the CCC for three sessions p.w. These leads, 

and their deputies, would ensure that information flowed up to and from the CCC 

Board of which they were members. The diagram also highlighted other members 

of the CCC Board (Governing Body), six sub-committees of the Board, and an 

Operations Group. 

Gillian indicated that appointments were now being made to the proposed 

structure. Dr Kate Bidwell (Derwentside GP) had been appointed as Interim Chair, 

and Dr Neil O‟Brien (Chester le Street GP) had been appointed as Clinical 

Accountable Officer. Other appointments had also been made to a Primary Care 

Quality and Development clinical post and Lay member positions. An advert was 

also out for Managing Director on Very Senior Manager (VSM) grade. Concern 

was expressed adverts were not being advertised nationally to give local PCT staff 

facing redundancy first opportunity to attain posts. The meeting also expressed 

concern in relation to the escalating management costs of the proposed new 

organisation. 

Dr Panke commented that GP Constituency Leads/Deputies were currently being 

identified and that the Durham Constituency was experiencing difficulty in 

identifying GPs to take on this work. He had expressed an interest in the Durham 

Constituency GP Deputy role but no-one had come forward in relation to the GP 

Lead role. He had considered applying for the GP Lead role but come to the 

conclusion that the time commitment was likely to escalate and the remuneration 

was insufficient. 

70

Dr Panke and Gillian were due to stand down from the current Joint Locality 

Executive Group in July, 2012, with new appointments coming into place from 

September, 2012. 

9. Locality Patients’ Reference Group 

Debra Hindson indicated that the above group had now met twice. The Group 

included ten patients from different surgeries and a representative from a similar 

but more established group in Derwentside. 

At the last meeting in April, 2012, Dr Kate Bidwell had identified the initial priorities 

of the Consortium as follows: Health Visiting; Urgent Care Centres; ECGs in 

primary care; A&E Outpatient Clinics; GP Nursing Bed Project; Continence 

Service; Hospital Avoidance Schemes; Dermatology; and Minor Surgery. 

Gillian enquired whether the Reference Group had any proposals on how Patient 

Participation Groups should be working. Debra commented that people were 

worried about how the views of patients were going to make any difference to how 

services were commissioned. She also indicated that one or two surgeries‟ Patient 

Participation Group members were very involved within their surgeries sitting and 

talking to patients about issues (e.g. Chevely Park) and fundraising for equipment 

e.g. ECG monitors. 


It was agreed that the next meeting would take place on Thursday, 

8 th November, 2012, at 6.00 p.m. 

/GPB 

20 July, 2012 

71

APPENDIX 9 


Claypath Medical Practice 

Annual Patient Survey 

January, 2013 

RESPONSE RATE: 

250 Questionnaires distributed in the Practice and 226 were returned giving an “in 

practice” return rate of 90.4% 

. 

A further 60 questionnaires were distributed via the Virtual Patient Participation 

Group, and 8 were returned giving an on-line return rate of 13.33% 

Combining the above, the practice distributed 310 questionnaires of which 234 

questionnaires were returned giving an overall return rate of 75.48%. 

SURVEY RESULTS: 

RECEPTION 

1 = very dissatisfied; 2 = dissatisfied; 3 = neither satisfied or dissatisfied; 

4 = satisfied; 5 = very satisfied 

Qu 1 : How satisfied are you with the services provided by reception 

Of the 234 returned questionnaires, 2 did not enter any response. Of the 

remaining 232 responses the outcome was: 

Very dissatisfied = 3 replies 1.3% 

Dissatisfied = 4 replies 1.7% 

Neither satisfied or dissatisfied = 6 replies 2.6% 

Satisfied = 64 replies 27.6% 

Very satisfied = 155 replies 66.8% 

Qu 2 : The efficiency and friendliness of the staff 


remaining 233 responses, the outcome was: 






72

Qu 3 : The ease of making an appointment to see a doctor 








Qu 4:Are you aware that booked appointments are for 10 minutes 

Of the 234 returned questionnaires the outcome was: 

Yes = 166 replies 71% 

No = 68 replies 29% 

Qu 5: Are you aware that you can pre-book an appointment with a doctor up 

to two weeks in advance 


Yes = 129 replies 55.1% 

No = 105 replies 44.9% 

Qu 6: Are you aware that you can pre-book an appointment with a Nurse 

Practitioner instead of a doctor for minor conditions 


Yes = 210 replies 90% 

No = 24 replies 10% 

Qu 7: How satisfied are you with the standard of the patient environment 

within the Health Centre 







73

CLINICAL 


Qu 8: Standard of care provided by the nurse in terms of their 

A: Approachability 








B: Quality of listening and interest 








C: Explanations concerning your condition/treatment 








D: Caring and concern 








74

Qu 9: Standard of care provided by the doctors in terms of their: 

A; Approachability 








B: Quality of listening and interest 








C; Explanations concerning your condition/treatment 








D: Caring and concern 








75

Opening Hours 

Qu 10: Are you aware of the practice’s extended opening hours for prebooked 

appointments only 


remaining 229, the outcome was: 


No = 116 replies 51.0% 

Qu 11: How satisfied are you with our opening hours 








General Questions 

Qu 12 Is there anything from your visit to the practice today that you 

consider the practice should improve 




No = 172 replies 84.7% 

Comments noted are listed below: 

General 

No! 

Everything excellent (as normal)! 

Very good practice. 

Premises/waiting areas 

Fresh coat of emulsion paint in upstairs waiting room! 

76

More toys/books to entertain small children. 

Heaviness of door not acceptable! 

Front door sticks and its very heavy. 

Waiting areas could be better. 

Litter on steps outside the surgery; also frequently ungritted. 

Something to occupy patients waiting in the various waiting areas - music, 

magazines, or bring back the fish you had in the old surgery! 

Car Park 

Parking of cars. 

Car parking – can you change this!! 

Car parking in an ideal situation. 

Attending physiotherapy appointments in Green Lane can be very dangerous when 

the carpark is not gritted regularly. 

Appointments 

Time keeping appointments can run up to 30 mins late. 

It would help if reception could warn if a Dr was having to run late on appointments 

because of emergencies or problems. 

Ability to book routine compulsory follow-ups more than 2 weeks ahead. 

Booking appointments is difficult eg 2.30pm or 8.30am if you need a particular GP. 

Accurate appointment re-scheduling. 

Information 

A leaflet with opening hours. Services that doctors provide, ways of book an 

appointment, on-line booking of appointments! 

Publicity, so that patients know about the changes you‟re making, especially 

patients who don‟t attend very often. Invite people to sign up for an e-newsletter 

77

Qu 13: Are you aware of the practice website www.claypathdoctors.co.uk 




No = 131 replies 53.0% 

Qu 14: Would you recommend the Claypath Medical Centre 




No = 28 replies 12.2% 

Please share with us any additional thoughts you may have about the 

service we provide, both positive and negative, including things perhaps that 

we should stop doing and things that you would wish us to do that we do not 

do at present. 

You provide an excellent, efficient service and every nurse and doctor I‟ve sent has 

been very good. 

Perhaps a clinic weekly/monthly where patients could have moles/skin blemishes 

checked without having to bother the doctors. 

Whilst patients can get an appointment with a doctor, continuity of care can often 

be a problem. 

I find the practice to be faultless and I am very satisfied. 

I was impressed with the Green Lane premises. It strikes me that if surgeries were 

open for MUCH longer hours and equipped to deal with minor accidents etc, it 

would cut down people going to A+E. Many of whom attend because of NEITHER 

and accident NOR and emergency. Surely this would make better use of NHS 

facilities and save money in the log run. 

The current practice of issuing 4 appointments at 2.30pm its quite impossible to 

acquire an appointments sometime as even if you start ringing before 2.30pm, 

when you eventually get through to the reception the appointments have almost 

always been taken already. Trying to ring at 8.30am is very busy and does not 

give the required result either. 

78

Excellent service provided especially compared with some friends/relatives 

experience further south in the country. Appreciate being able to keep to one GP 

mostly so that there is genuine continuity of care. 

Excellent service in all aspects. 

Difficult to get appointment. 

Depends which Doctor you see regarding Q‟s 8&9. Some are excellent, others 

not. 

Very hard to make comments since I have used the services so infrequently. 

How about online booking of appointments to ease the waiting time of booking that 

occurs every morning at 8.30am 

Our children have consultant led care from the RVI and you have always been very 

helpful and efficient at co-ordinating prescriptions and other issues , like flu jabs etc 

+ Dr Dellar came to their Child Development Team meeting at Chester-Le-Street, 

which I very much appreciated. Thank you for all your help. 

Find doctors and nurses are very variable in how treat someone with my 

conditions. Some are very approachable/good to talk to and others give the 

impression you are wasting their time. I like to stick to doctors and nurses I know 

in the practice as am anxious about how others might react. 

My negative comments about the nurses only apply to the Nurse Practitioner, who 

appears uncaring, disrespectful and in many ways uninformed about the most 

simplest medical issues. The service elsewhere is brilliant. However, reception 

staff must try at least to be friendly. A smile wont hurt them. 

Doctors provide a good service, but again it seems that everyone at the practice is 

unmotivated and disenfranchised. Good luck with these. I‟m glad I have now left. 

Although receptionists are generally very professional, on occasion there are times 

when their eyes done leave the computer screen. I do feel that at least brief eye 

contact should be made with patients. 

Staff on reception at Green Lane are not friendly never smile and can on occasion 

be abrupt. Totally different at Claypath. Surgery first class. 

I can‟t think of any practice that would be better than this one. 

Overall very good. Nothing major to complain about. Only issue is that I always 

see a different doctor which is not beneficial for a long term follow-up. It would be 

nice to have more often the same doctor. 

My wife and I and family have been with Claypath Medical Centre for over 50 years 

and we have always been very content and satisfied with all aspects. 

Recent problem with urine specimen procedure, I have spoken to the HCA team 

about this! Staff now more helpful on telephone. The front door heaviness is really 

79

not acceptable Automate it please. The ladies toilet area is poorly appointed for 

depositing items or articles when doing specimens. Dr Panke is always cheerful 

and attentive! Pity he can‟t have a space to practice in that fits his height and 

personality. Please clear rubbish from the steps!! PS There should be a envelope 

for this or a box to „post‟ it in really. 

I have been registered with CMC for 12 years and have been very satisfied with 

the treatment I have received during this time – from all members of staff. 

Not always happy about complete closure of surgery and co-op pharmacy over 

weekends. Worries that problems can arise over medications between Drs when 

ones particular Dr is not available and a temporary practitioner has to be 

consulted. 

The opportunity for nurse to book subsequent appointments was a useful facility, 

now this has to be done through the desk and is an inconvenience to nursing staff 

and to patients. Look forward to being able to order repeat prescriptions through 

website. 

I have always found the service from CMP excellent. 

More lines or ringback capability when trying to call for appt at a busy time. 

On the whole I find the experience of attending the medical centre good. 

Nothing I can think of at the moment. Better magazines, daily papers perhaps! TV 

maybe More doctors that can do cortisone injections. 

It would be good if the patient reference file could be kept up to date and had more 

TLC. 

Too hard to get an appointment at the time you want with the doctor you want. 

Providing a queue system for booking appointments via telephone on the day. 

Consider the staff to be 1 st class, for myself and the family members I‟ve had to 

bring along. Level of care/referrals exemplary and the ease of making appts the 

envy of my workmates. Reception staff cope laudably with sick, moaning people 

taking at them all day and are to be commended. 

Switch the radio off in the waiting area. 

This is only my second visit. 

Having been a patient for over 40 years I have always been extremely satisfied 

with the practice. I often recommend the practice to friends. 

I think Claypath Practice provides a fantastic service. I have never not been able 

to come and see a doctor when I have wanted. 

80

Most of the nurses are very friendly – all but 1. (Only 1 has been off hand in the 

past) – regarding my ear needing to be syringed making it clear she disapproved of 

the treatment. The next nurse I saw handled it differently – she came up with a 

solution which has meant I have only needed it done 1 in 12 months as apposed to 

3-4 times a year. 

Queue system would be very good on the phone system instead of phoning back 

time and time again (Monday morning) 

It would help if the nurses were named. 

I‟m American so I‟m not too experienced with the NHS, but every experience I‟ve 

had with it has been great. I would have liked it though if there was an orientation 

about the NHS for internationals, of course, that‟s something to talk to the Univ 

about. 

Improve the waiting time in the surgery. 

More hand sanitise stations/areas, eg in waiting room upstairs/exits. 

Nothing very satisfied. 

I have fortnightly blood tests with Glenda, she is very very good, never feel a thing. 

She should be complimented. 

Dr Panke has been first rate his diagnosis of my condition was brilliant. I would 

recommend him to anyone. 

If there are any awards going both should be put in for one. 

Dr Marsden is a lovely, caring and understanding GP! 

Doctors should take more initiative and be familiar with the patient‟s history (which 

is usually on the screen in front of them). Hearing “what can I do for you” and 

“what would you like me to do” does not inspire much confidence in their ability to 

treat you well. 

Nurses are brilliant in their attention to the patient and care. 

All good, far better than West Yorkshire. 

Car parking – need more/stop people parking where there aren‟t spaces! 

I think the service is very good. 

My major concern is about the current changes to the NHS, I wouldn‟t want this 

practice to go over to some private provider ~(eg Virgin Healthcare) nor would I 

want your hard pressed GP‟s to be taken up with even more paper work. 

Not enough car parking spaces. 

The upstairs waiting area is looking a bit shabby. 

81

Water cooler or coffee machine while waiting to be seen. 

The car park always seems full and the disabled bay facility is often abused. 

TV in the waiting area would be a good idea. Free wifi also. 

Again repeat prescriptions difficult especially in bad weather. 

As a family, we have always received excellent treatment for over twenty years. I 

cant think of ay improvements at the moment, but would like the opportunity to 

thank all staff. 

I have always used this medical centre due to professionalism of its staff, never 

had any complaints or concerns except parking. Sometimes when inside there are 

few patients but no parking spaces in car park. 

I am 84 years, I recently had a home visit this was dealt with efficiently and 

promptly as was follow on care. Thank you. 

Water machine/drinks tea coffee machine. 

Always excellent care provided. 

Difficult to see the same doctor. 

Everyone very helpful. 

Nursing team exemplary, Andrea in particular. 

Reception team are very pleasant and helpful. 

I am happy with the service I have received from everyone in the Claypath 

Practice. Thank you to everyone for your care and courteous concern. 

Pain management clinic, I have to travel to Sacriston. 

More that satisfied for over 40 years! 

Nurse Tracey is very friendly and approachable, provides good service 

professional care. 

Q 8+9 It is difficult to give a blanket judgement regarding the items in these 

questions as not all doctors/nurses are a 3 or 4 or 5 so I have taken an average. 

I prefer to see the same doctor – for continuity of care and this is Dr Kent. I am 

very happy with his treatment of me. I find him attentive, caring and emphatic yet 

challenging and firm when he thinks it is necessary to be so in my interest. 

82

I have now been with the practice over 2 years and I am more than pleased with 

the care I have received and the service provided. 

All round very good. 

None of the practice, however I have recently used the 111 service and it took over 

half an hour to get to speak to someone. 

Service generally excellent – we are very fortunate! Today Dr Frame gave me the 

usual through, competent, and approachable care – a great asset to the practice! 

Doctors take great care that you are given the correct medical treatment 

irrespective of age. 

I have been with the practice for 46 years and have been very happy with the 

service you provide. 

Booking 8.30 difficult to „get in‟ and then find already booked! 

One minor point would be the sharing of doctors between the Uni Health Centre 

and Claypath, its not always clear when doctors will be at either practice. 

However, this hasn‟t resulted in difficulty making an appointments etc, just a 

suggestions that availability etc, might be communicated more clearly (if possible, 

of course). 

I am very satisfied indeed withal the care and attention I have been given in the 

past year. 

Car parking is sometimes difficult, but to be realistic there is little you can do about 

it. 

The services provided by this Practice are second to none! Whenever I ring for an 

appointment I am always seen on the same day and I appreciate this as I am 

aware some Practices can only offer same day appointments for emergencies only 

and patients sometimes wait 10 days for a routine appointment. Please continue 

as you are doing – WELL DONE! 

I find all the staff very friendly polite, approachable and caring. The level of care 

and concern is second to none. I really appreciate this surgery. Thankyou. 

[END] 

83

APPENDIX 10 



Notes of the meeting held on Thursday, 14 th February, 2013, at 6.00 p.m., 


PRESENT: 



Karen Bruce 

Barbara Fox 

Robin Harris 

Debra Hindson 

Ron Lane 



Carole Reeves 


Joyce Schlesinger 

Kathleen Wood 

APOLOGIES: 

Tracy Watson 

Clive Beddoes 

Janet Gill 

Jack Gill 

(Deputy General Manager) 

1. Welcome 

Mrs Joyce Schlesinger was welcomed to her first meeting of the Group, as a 

patient representative. 



Gillian confirmed that the Patient Participation Group currently had nineteen 

members - an increase of one member since the last meeting (see above). 

She also confirmed that the membership of the practice‟s “virtual” Patient 

Reference Group had increased and was now 49 members, 44% of which were in 

the age group 18-30years. This total membership was after the practice had 

deleted a number of members who were no longer registered with the practice - 

mainly students. It was noted that this was a process the practice would have to 

routinely undertake because of the number of student de-registrations each year. 

84

Concern was expressed that the student representative on the Patient Participation 

Group (Jenny James, Education and Welfare Officer, DSU) was again absent. It 

was noted that Dr Andrew Kent and Gillian had met with her in December, 2012, 

and that she had made some helpful amendments to the University Health Centre 

practice leaflet, and agreed to provide feedback on the services provided at the 

University Health Centre from DSU Welfare Officers. It was agreed to ask her to 

nominate a deputy to attend meetings of the group if she was unable to attend. 

The practice was still seeking a postgraduate representative to join the Group. 


The notes of the last meeting were agreed. It was noted that Gillian had made an 

amendment to the draft notes sent out in December, 2012, to include reference to 

concerns raised by Carole Reeves and Muriel Sawbridge under item 9.3 

Identification of commissioning concerns. 


4.9 On-line booking appointments/ordering repeat prescriptions 

Gillian reported that she had sought assistance from members of the Patient 

Participation Group and “virtual” Patient Reference Group to help pilot on-line 

ordering of repeat prescriptions. Nine patients had agreed to pilot the facility and 

the pilot had started this week. It was intended to extend the pilot to include 

approximately 800 patients in about two months time, and if this was successful 

the facility would be made available to all patients. 

The practice also intended to provide an on-line facility to book appointments. It 

was noted, however, that piloting this facility was on-hold until Tracy Watson, who 

managed the clinical rotas and appointments system, returned from sick-leave. 

4.10 Podiatry provision for diabetic patients 

As indicated at the last meeting, the CCG had produced a revised service 

specification for core podiatry services which it was noted did not include provision 

for diabetic annual foot assessments. Gillian had reported this concern via the 

newly established Safeguarding Incidents Reporting Mechanism (SIRM) which the 

CCG was promoting as a tool for practices to report commissioning concerns and 

issues. To-date, however, there had been no response. 

Gillian explained that practice HCAs were trained to provide annual foot 

assessments for diabetic patients with low risk feet. Of particular concern, 

however, was the lack of provision for diabetic patients with medium to high risk 

feet to have their assessments undertaken by a podiatrist. The practice had 

managed to secure additional podiatry provision to include these assessments for 

2012/13. This arrangement, however, came to an end on 31 st March, 2013. 

Barbara Fox enquired whether the Durham GP Constituency was able to help in 

ensuring diabetic annual foot assessments were commissioned for all patients. 

85

Gillian indicated that this issue had been raised by other general practices in the 

constituency and she would raise it again at the next meeting of the Constituency 

at the end of March, 2013. 


Gillian commented that David Stoker had approached the Council regarding the 

possibility of providing disabled car parking bays on the road outside the practice. 

Regrettably David was not present to provide an update. Gillian would pursue this 

issue with him outside the meeting. 

4.4 Additional extended hours 

Gillian commented that the practice had been providing additional extended hours 

on a Saturday, between 8.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m., from November, 2012. This was 

being paid for from Clinical Commissioning Group non-recurrent winter pressures 

funding up to end February, 2013. 

It was noted that the additional extended hours had now been extended up to 23 rd 

March, 2013. 

Debra Hindson indicated that she had been unaware that the practice was open on 

a Saturday and had accessed the Out of Hours Service for her daughter at the 

weekend. She indicated that she would have preferred her daughter to have been 

seen by one of the practice GPs who had access to her medical record but she 

had not been informed that the surgery was open at the University Health Centre. 

Dr Kent indicated that the 111 service was aware of the practice‟s Saturday 

opening at the UHC and had a direct line to inform the practice if they were 

referring any patients back to the surgery that day. The surgeries on a Saturday at 

UHC were filled with pre-booked appointments but on the day referrals from 111 

and walk-in patients would be seen. No home visits, however, were undertaken on 

a Saturday. Dr Kent felt that as 111 had originally intended sending an 

ambulance to Debra‟s daughter they had obviously considered she was not well 

enough to attend the surgery and had not, therefore, mentioned that the surgery 

was open. 

4.5 Patient Bequest/Donations Fund 

Gillian reported that the practice had received a number of proposals for 

expenditure against the Patient Bequest/Donations Fund. These had all been 

considered by the practice group responsible for considering how the fund was 

used. 

Agreed expenditure included: 

a) An electric/hydraulic couch - to allow the practice to examine disabled or 

obese patients; 

b) 2 Foldable Wheelchairs - one to be kept at reception at each site for 

patients who fainted/became unwell in surgery; 

86

c) Higher waiting room chairs - couple to be provided in waiting areas at both 

sites 

d) Art prints - for corridor walls/waiting areas at UHC; 

It had also been agreed to contact local artists to ask if they would be interested in 

displaying art for sale at the Claypath Medical Centre. 

The meeting was enthused by the proposal to display artwork in the Claypath 

Medical Centre and suggested the practice could consider contacting an artist to 

paint a wall mural. Carole Millington informed the meeting of a practice which had 

commissioned a wall mural depicting the stages of life from birth to death. 

Beryl McDougal commented that the Laing Art Gallery had recently had an 

exhibition of “Artwork in Hospitals”, by Quentin Blake. This work had included the 

involvement of different sets of patients e.g. women in pregnancy, children, cancer 

patients, etc. who were encouraged to talk about their experiences and how they 

could be represented by him in art work. 

It was also suggested that the practice display health information posters and in 

particular posters re “Healthy Eating”. 

Gillian agreed to pass these suggestions onto the two practice partners who had 

agreed to explore displaying artwork at CMC. 

Beryl McDougal questioned whether the practice had agreed to subscribe to 

copies of “Poetry for the Waiting Room”, which cost £25 p.a. Dr Kent agreed to 

look into this. 

In relation to the repeated requests for water-coolers at CMC, the group had 

looked into providing one on each floor. It was established, however, that this 

would cost in the region of £1,600 over three years just to rent the machines, and 

not including installation and consumable costs. The group had offered to pay all 

costs in the first three years if the practice would be agreeable to pick up the costs 

thereafter. The practice, however, had considered this too expensive. Attention 

had also been drawn to the health and safety issue of patients carrying and spilling 

water on the stairs which could potentially lead to a patient slipping and suing the 

practice. 

Gillian indicated that the practice had, therefore, agreed not to provide watercoolers. 

She commented, however, that the practice was willing to provide glasses 

of water for patients who felt unwell. 

5. Annual Patient Satisfaction Survey, Claypath Medical Centre 

5.1 Survey results (January, 2013) 


Survey at the Claypath Medical Centre, undertaken in January, 2013. 

87

It was noted that 90.4% of the 250 questionnaires distributed in the practice had 

been returned, but that only 13.33% of the 60 questionnaires distributed via the 

Virtual Patient Reference Group had been returned - giving an overall return rate of 

75.48% due to the disappointingly low on-line response rate. Gillian indicated that 

the practice had since reviewed the membership of the Virtual Patient Reference 

Group and deleted members who were no longer registered with the practice. This 

exercise would be repeated prior to any future communications with the Reference 

Group. 

Gillian went through the results of the satisfaction survey comparing them with the 

results of the previous year. It was noted that for most questions patient 

satisfaction was either the same or very marginally lower. The survey results, 

however, still demonstrated that practice achievement was very good in most 

areas. Overall the group considered that the practice was to be congratulated on 

its achievement. 

The meeting then focused on areas where it was considered the practice could 

improve its performance. It was noted that nearly a third of survey respondents 

were unaware that booked appointments were for 10minutes, and half were 

unaware that they could pre-book appointments with a doctor up to two weeks in 

advance. Over half were also unaware of the practice‟s extended opening hours. It 

was agreed that the practice should review how it communicated these messages 

to patients. 

Gillian commented that she had reviewed the suggestions for practice 

improvements. A number of comments had been made in relation to the upkeep of 

the surgery, and it was noted that this was being addressed through a phased 

refurbishment plan. It was acknowledged that demand for car parking would 

always be greater than that provided. Gillian indicated, however, that the 

introduction of some on-line facilities e.g. ordering repeat prescriptions and 

booking appointments on line could reduce the number of patients having to attend 

the practice. She indicated that the practice was currently piloting ordering repeat 

prescriptions on-line and that it was hoped to introduce some on-line booking of 

appointments in the summer. 

It was noted that the Patient Participation Group file held in the upstairs waiting 

area had now been updated. 

The meeting considered the problem of patients trying to book appointments on 

the day. It was explained that these appointments were supposed to be for 

patients who needed to see a GP urgently and not for routine appointments which 

should be booked ahead. Dr Kent commented that the practice did not turn any 

patients away who needed to be seen urgently the same day and that this could 

not be said of all practices. 

It was suggested that the practice consider having more lines into the practice but 

this was not considered practical in terms of finance or staffing. A telephone 

queuing system was suggested but it was noted that patients would still get an 

engaged tone at busy times e.g. 8.30 a.m. and 2.30 p.m. as the queue only held so 

many calls. A number of telephone queuing systems also used premium rate 

88

numbers and the practice was against patients having to pay more for their calls 

when ringing the practice. 

It was noted that patients appreciated being able to telephone a GP for advice 

rather than taking up an appointment and that this enabled patients to have 

increased continuity of care. Gillian indicated that the practice was happy to 

provide this facility but that it was currently causing problems as a number of 

patients requesting the GP to call back were not there when the GP phoned back. 

This wasted GP time in trying to get back in touch with the patient. During 

discussion it was agreed that the reception staff should politely inform patients that 

there needed to be someone there when the GP called back. 

5.2 Development of Claypath Medical Centre Patient Satisfaction 

Action Plan 

Taking into account the responses to the above survey, the meeting considered 

which issues to be included in the draft Claypath Medical Centre Patient 

Satisfaction Action Plan for 2013/14. 

The following issues were identified: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Difficulty in making appointments 

Difficulty in ordering repeat prescriptions 

Informing patients about services practice provides 

Interior of surgery requires re-decoration/updating 

Carparking 

Patient access to advice from doctor over the telephone 

A number of actions were identified to address the above issues. Gillian agreed to 

include these in a draft action plan to be distributed to members of the group for 

their approval and comment with the notes of the meeting. Gillian would then 

produce a final version action plan which would be the subject of quarterly review 

by the Group. 

6. Monitoring of Annual Patient Satisfaction Action Plan - University 


The meeting had received the final version of the University Health Centre Action 

Plan for 2012/13. This included a final column indicating progress made against 

each action point. 

It was noted that Dr Kent and Gillian had met with Jenny James, Education and 

Welfare Officer, Durham Student Union, in December, 2012. They reported that 

this had been a useful meeting and that Jenny had agreed to obtain feedback on 

practice services from other Welfare Officers. She had also contributed to revision 

of the University Health Centre patient leaflet. 

It was noted that good progress had been made in achieving most of the action 

points. Gillian indicated that the practice would continue to work on those action 

points which had not been completed. 

89

7. North Durham Clinical Commissioning Group 

7.1 Patients’ Reference Group 

Carole Millington and Debra Hindson fed back from the North Durham Clinical 

Commissioning Group‟s (NDCCG) Patient Reference Group: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Group continues to be well attended and knowledge is expanding as 

new speakers attend the group and pass on their information. 

Recent speaker, Joan Sutherland, Medicines Management. She led 

discussion on the issue previously raised in the group about possible 

confusion caused by issue of generic medicines. Group recognised this 

was a huge national issue and not something they could take on board. 

They will, however, continue to take an interest in this issue. 

A report has been commissioned from Durham University to consider the 

legitimacy of patient/public engagement. Bob Hudson will be addressing 

the next meeting of the group in March, 2013, and taking the views of the 

group into account. 

Group had feedback, from “Volunteer Driver” event providing information 

about patient transport schemes. Two or three voluntary organisations 

provide transport for patients who need to be taken to hospital - funded to 

end March, 2014. It was noted that practice patients had used these 

schemes. Gillian to investigate whether these schemes were publicised in 

the practice. 

A mental health consultation is underway (January - March, 2013) run by 

Age Concern. The consultation aims to give mental health service 

users/carers more say in the review and improvement of local health 

services. Posters on the consultation are in display in each surgery. 

Concern continues to be felt by the Group at the potential sidelining of 

issues relating to people with learning difficulties. Lot of people don‟t 

understand the difference between mental health and learning disability - 

not all people with learning disability have mental health problems and vice 

versa. 

Concern was expressed about the de-commissioning of Speech and 

Language Therapy (SALT) provision. 

Patients‟ Reference Group Expense Reimbursement Policy draft now 

published. Patients wondering whether this will apply to members of 

Patient Participation Groups. 

Muriel Sawbridge drew attention to a recent insert in the Durham 

Advertiser which set out the aims and objectives of each of the Clinical 

Commissioning Groups in the Northern Region. The aims and objectives of North 

Durham Clinical Commissioning Group were included in the insert. She 

considered the insert, which would also be in the Durham Times next weekend, 

would be of interest to members of the Patient Participation Group. 

Carol Reeves reported that at the beginning of January, 2013, the 38 Degrees 

North “Save our NHS” petition, which included over 1,000 local signatures, was 

handed in to Kate Bidwell and Neil O‟Brien representing the North Durham Clinical 

90

Commissioning Group. 38 Degrees North “Save our NHS” provided a booklet with 

amendments for CCGs to add to their constitution which aimed to protect the 

CCGs from private providers taking over local NHS services. Some CCGs had 

already agreed to adapt their constitution in line with the recommendations of 38 

Degrees North. 

7.2 General update 

Gillian reported that the Shadow North Durham Clinical Commissioning Group 

was moving into the final stages of authorisation and hoped to be fully 

authorised without conditions to take up the former PCT commissioning role 

from 1 st April, 2013. 

Gillian also reported that North Durham GPs were holding an exploratory 

meeting on Thursday, 28 th February, 2013, to discuss establishing a GP 

provider organisation/company to complete with other providers, including the 

private sector, as a provider of services. 

7.3 Identification of commissioning concerns 

Gillian circulated a paper, previously tabled at the last meeting, summarising 

commissioning concerns/issues identified by practices across the Durham 

Constituency. These covered a broad range of services including primary 

care, community, and hospital services. She asked the Group to review the 

issues raised and let her know: 

 

 

whether they agreed with the issues raised; 

whether they had any other comments, concerns or ideas regarding the 

commissioning of services. 

She would then ensure that any issues identified by members of the practice 

Patient Participation Group were fed back to the CCG via the North Durham 

Constituency. 


It was agreed that the next meeting would take place in July, 2013, and that the 

main agenda item would be to review the results from the University Health Centre 

Annual Patient Survey undertaken in June, 2013. 

/GPB 19 March, 2013 

91


APPENDIX 11 

UHC Patient Survey Action Plan 2012/13 

(in response to results from 2012 UHC Patient Survey) 

(includes monitoring at PPG meeting of 14 th February, 2012) 

92

Patient Experience/ Issue Action Milestones Led by: To achieve by 

+ monitoring 

as at 14.02.13 

ACCESS 

1. Issue: 

Long waiting time to be 

seen in Open Surgery 

To try to reduce 

waiting time in 

Open Surgery 

 

To promote “Open Surgeries” for 

patients presenting with simple, noncomplex 

conditions and booked 

appointments for patients with 

complicated or multiple problems by: 

- notices to be displayed in 

practice waiting areas; 

- information included in practice 

website; 

- information to be sent to DSU 

Welfare Officers to include in 

individual college newsletters. 

Gillian Bevan 

Tracy Watson 

November, 

2012 

(ACHIEVED) 

(ACHIEVED) 

Dr Kent/Gillian 

met with Jenny 

James, DSU 

rep., 3 rd Dec, 

2012. 

 

To provide an additional Nurse 

Practitioner to undertake booked 

appointments and Open Surgeries at 

the University Health Centre. 

Gillian Bevan 

Tracy Watson 

September, 

2012 

(ACHIEVED) 

2. Issue: 

Difficulty in booking 

appointments 

To improve 

patient 

experience in 

 

 

To review the provision of booked 


the University Health Centre and adjust 

as necessary (as below). 

To review the provision of booked 


the University Health Centre and adjust 

Gillian Bevan 

Tracy Watson 

Gillian Bevan 

Tracy Watson 

October, 2012 

(ACHIEVED) 

October, 2012 

(ACHIEVED) 

93

Patient experience 

Long queue at 

reception to book 

appointments; 

Unaware 

appointments 

bookable in advance; 

Unaware can obtain 

telephone advice 

from doctors; 

Not able to book online. 

booking 

appointments 

 

 

as necessary (as above). 

produce practice notice for display in 

waiting areas promoting range of 

available appointments i.e. same-day, 

pre-bookable, extended hours, etc. and 

with whom, when, and how these may 

be booked. 

To develop a UHC practice leaflet “How 

to book Appointments” and ensure 

constant supply available in reception/ 

waiting areas. 

Gillian Bevan/ 

Tracy Watson 

Gillian Bevan 

November, 

2012 

(PARTIALLY 

ACHIEVED) 

November, 

2012 

(TO DO) 

 

To review and revise information on 

practice website on “How to book 

appointments” 

Gillian Bevan 

November, 

2012 

(TO DO ) 

 

To send information to DSU Welfare 

Officers to include in individual college 

newsletters. 

Gillian Bevan 

(ONGOING) 

REPEAT PRESCRIPTIONS 

3. Issue: 

Obtaining repeat 

prescriptions 

To improve 

arrangements for 

ordering repeat 

 

 

To pilot facility to book appointments 

on-line via Practice Website. 

To develop a facility for students to 

collect repeat prescriptions from Boots 

Market Place. 


Tracy Watson/ 

George 

Dobinson 

DEFERRED to 

July, 2013 – in 

Tracy Watson‟s 

absence. 

(TO DO) 

November, 

2012 

(ACHIEVED) 

94

Patient experience: 

Difficulty in accessing 

practice to leave 

requests for repeat 

prescriptions 

INFORMATION 

4. Issue: 

Patients unaware when 

to consult with a practice 

nurse instead of a doctor 

prescriptions 

To clarify what 

services practice 

nurses can see 

and/or treat 

 

 

 

To develop facility to order repeat 

prescriptions on-line via Practice 

Website. 

To revise and display patient 

information on “How to obtain a repeat 

prescription” taking account of above. 

To produce a practice notice for display in 

waiting areas promoting the range of 

services which can be seen and/or treated 

by practice nursing staff 


Anne Phillips 

Pilot up and 

running 

To action when 

pilot concluded. 

(TO DO) 

November, 

2012 

(ACHIEVED - 

notice on 

display re range 

of services 

provided by 

Nurse 

Practitioner) 

 

To include the above information on the 


Gillian Bevan 

November, 

2012 

(TO DO) 

95

5. Issue: 

Students unaware of 

services available from 

the UHC Travel Health 

Clinic 

To promote 

awareness of the 

practice Travel 

Health Clinic 

 

 

To develop a practice leaflet and poster on 

the services available through the UHC 

Travel Health Clinic 

To further develop the Travel Health 

section of the practice website 


Jane Wrightson 


Jane Wrightson 

Deferred to 

Spring Term 

Deferred to 

Spring Term 

PATIENT CONSULTATION 

6. Issue: 

Patients unaware of 

Practice Patient 

Participation Group and 

“Virtual” Patient 

Reference Group; 

 

 

Need to increase 

membership of both 

groups 

Need to engage with 

student patients 

To promote 

practice Patient 

Participation 

 

To publicise the Practice Patient 

Participation Group within practice 

premises at both sites by displaying notices 

and file of previous meetings, etc. 

To review/update the Patient Participation 

Group section of the practice website. 

To promote the practice‟s “Virtual” Patient 

Reference Group as a means of 

communicating with student patients 

Gillian Bevan 

Gillian Bevan 

Gillian Bevan 

Ongoing 

Ongoing 

Ongonig 

/GPB 

19 March, 2013 

96

APPENDIX 12 


Patient Survey Action Plan 2013/14 

(in response to results from January, 2013, CMC Patient Survey) 

Patient issue/experience Action: Milestones Led by To achieve by 

ACCESS 

1. Issue: 

Difficulty making 

appointments 


To improve patient 

experience booking 

appointments 

To review practice leaflet 

“How to book appointments” 

and ensure constant supply 

available in reception/ 

waiting areas 


Tracy Watson 

May, 2013 

 

 

 

Difficulty phoning 

surgery at 8.30 a.m. 

Unaware appts can 

be booked in 

advance; 

Not able to book on 

line 

To review Info on practice 

website on “How to book 

appts” 

To identify two weeks 

period and arrange for 

reception to hand out 

leaflets to patients 

Gillian Bevan 

Tracy Watson 

May, 2013 

June, 2013 

To pilot facility to book 

appointments on line via 


Tracy Watson/ 

George Dobinson 

July, 2013 

97

ORDERING REPEAT 

PRESCRIPTIONS 

2. Issue: 

Difficulty ordering repeat 

prescriptions 

PATIENT INFORMATION 

3. Issue: 

Informing patients about 

services practice provides. 



services practice 

provides, ways to 

book appts in 

advance, etc. 

To improve 



prescriptions 


access to practice 

information 

To develop facility for online 

ordering of repeat 

prescriptions 

To consider installing an 

electronic patient 

information system in 

practice waiting areas at 

CMC 

Gillian Bevan 


Gillian Bevan 


Pilot: 


April, 2013 

PRACTICE ENVIRONMENT 

4. Issue: 

Interior of surgery requires 

re-decoration/updating 


Interior scruffy and 

could do with 

repainting 

Seats/seating areas 

and carpets shabby 

To improve practice 

environment 

To implement phased plan 

for refurbishment of 

Claypath Medical Centre. 

Work to include refreshing 

paintwork throughout, 

replacing carpets, etc. 

Gillian Bevan 

Ongoing 

98

CARPARKING 

5. Issue: 

Not enough car parking 

spaces 


experience. 

To reposition disabled bays 

when car park next 

resurfaced/repaired. 

Gillian Bevan 

Tracy Watson 

Date to be 

determined 

To provide more on-line 

facilities so less patients 

using the car park 

Gillian Bevan 


On-going 

CONTINUITY OF CARE 

6. Issue: 

Patient access to advice 

from doctor over the 

telephone 


Patients required to 

book appt for simple 

advice 


access to advice 

To communicate patient 

requests for telephone 

advice to GPs via 

messaging/task system. 

Tracy Watson 

On-going 

/GPB 

13 February, 2013 

99


APPENDIX 13 

Patient Survey Action Plan 2012/13 

(in response to results from February, 2012, CMC Patient Survey) 

(includes monitoring at PPG meeting of 29 th November, 2012) 

100

Patient Issue/Experience Action: Milestones Led by: To achieve by + 

Monitoring as at 

29.11.12: 

ACCESS 

101

1. Issue: 

Difficulty in making 

appointments 

To improve 

patient 

experience 

booking 

appointments 

 

To review practice leaflet “How to 

book Appointments” and ensure 

constant supply available in reception/ 

waiting areas. 


Tracy Watson 

April, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

Patient experience 

Difficulty phoning 

surgery at 8.30 am 

Unaware 

appointments can be 

booked in advance; 

Not able to book online. 

To add to practice leaflet that patients 

they do not need to ring at 8.30 a.m. if 

they need to be seen urgently, 

arrangements will be made for 

patients requiring urgent attention to 

be seen that day by duty doctor. 

 

To review information on practice 

website on “How to book 

appointments” 

Gillian Bevan 

Gillian Bevan 

April, 2012 

DELETED as 

agreed at PPG in 

July, 2012 - not 

feasible 

April, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

Formatted: Font: Italic 

Formatted: Bullets and Numbering 

 

To identify a two weeks period and 

arrange for reception to hand out 

leaflets on how to book appointments 

(i.e. same-day, pre-bookable, 

extended hours, etc. and with whom, 

when, and how these may be booked) 

to patients as they book in at 

reception. 

Tracy Watson 

May, 2012 

TO DO 

(Rolled over to 

2013/14 action 

plan) 

 

To repeat the above process handing 

out other practice leaflets, on a 

rotational basis. 

Tracy Watson 

(TO DO) 

(Date to be 

determined) 

102

To pilot facility to book appointments 

on-line via Practice Website. 


Tracy Watson/ 


DEFERRED to 

July, 2013 – in 

Tracy Watson‟s 

absence. 

2 Issue: 

Difficulty in attending for 

appointments 


Not able to book evening 

appointments 

To offer extended 

hours of opening 

 

 

To provide extended hours 

appointments 

To review practice leaflet/notices on 

“Extended Hours” 


Tracy Watson 


Tracy Watson 

Ongoing 

ACHIEVED - plus 

now also providing 

additional winter 

pressures extended 

hours from Nov 12 

to end April 13. 

May and Nov. 2012 

ACHIEVED 

3 Issue: 

Appointments wasted by 

patients who “Did Not 

Attend” 

4 Issue: 

Ordering repeat 

prescriptions 


To discourage 

patient DNAs 

To improve 



prescriptions 

 

 

 

To review/revise information on 

“Extended Hours” on practice website 

To introduce and promote robust 

practice “Did Not Attend” Policy. 

To promote DNA rates within practice. 

To further promote how to obtain 

repeat prescriptions – leaflets/website 

To develop facility to order repeat 

Gillian Bevan 


Tracy Watson 

Tracy Watson 


Tracy Watson 


May and Nov. 2012 

ACHIEVED 

March, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

March, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

Ongoing 

ACHIEVED 

Pilot ongoing 

103

Requesting 

shorter time 

between request 

for prescription 

and receipt of 

medication; 

System unclear 

and slow. 

 

 

prescriptions on-line via Practice 

Website. 

To revise and display patient 

information on “How to obtain a repeat 

prescription” 

To give newly registered patients 

information during registration with 

practice 

Tracy Watson/ 



Tracy Watson 

Tracy Watson 

May, 2012 

ACHIEVED 


onwards 

ACHIEVED 

Patient Issue/Experience Action: Milestones Led by: Progress as at 

November, 2012: 

CONTINUITY OF CARE 

5 Issue: 

Patient access to advice 

from doctor over the 

telephone 

To improve 

patient access to 

advice 

To communicate patient requests for 

telephone advice to GPs via 

messaging/task system. 

Tracy Watson 

Ongoing 

ACHIEVED 


Patients required 

to book appt for 

simple advice 

COMMUNICATION 

6 Issue: 

Appointment delays 


Patients not 

informed on 

arrival of delays 

To improve 

patient waiting 

experience 

Reception to advise patients if 

doctor/nurse running late 

Tracy Watson 

Ongoing 

ACHIEVED 

104

7 Issue: 

Access to practice 

information 


Information 

booklets not 

available upstairs 

Website doesn‟t 

show all doctors 

or detail special 

interest 

sufficiently 

To improve 

access to patient 

information 

To review location of practice information 

throughout practice 

To review the information on the practice 

website regarding doctors and their 

specialist interests 

Tracy Watson 

Gillian Bevan 

TO DO (await 

finalisation of CMC 

refurbishment ) 

(PARTIALLY 

ACHIEVED - 

List of doctors 

updated - still to 

review special 

interests) 



ENVIRONMENT 

8 Issue: 

Interior of surgery 

requires redecoration/updating 


Interior scruffy 

and could do with 

repainting 

Seats/seating 

areas and carpets 

shabby 

To improve 

practice 

environment 

 

To develop and implement phased 

plan for refurbishment of Claypath 

Medical Centre working to defined 

annual budget agreed by Partners. 

Work to include refreshing paintwork, 

cleaning seating and carpets, etc. 

Gillian Bevan 

(PARTIALLY 

ACHIEVED - 

Ongoing) 

105

9 Issue: 

Music in upstairs waiting 

room 


Music very dismal - 

request for more 

pleasing music e.g. 

Smooth FM 

To improve 

patients‟ waiting 

experience 

To change music in upstairs waiting area. Tracy Watson March, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

106



10 Issue: 

Magazines for patients 

in waiting areas; toys for 

children 


Lack of 

magazines/books etc for 

patients, and toys for 

children. 

11 Issue: 

Carparking 


Carpark is extremely 

dark at night for patients 

leaving the practice 

To improve 

patients‟ waiting 

experience 

To improve 

patients 

experience 

 

 

To seek advice from PCT Infection 

Control regarding magazines etc. being 

available in practice waiting areas. 

To review the use of the car park taking 

the interests of disabled patients, 

wheelchair users, other patients and staff 

into account. 

Tracy Watson April, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

Limited supply of 

magazines now 

avail. 

Gillian Bevan/Tracy 

Watson 

April, 2012 

ACHIEVED - 

agreed to reposition 

disabled bays when 

carpark next 

resurfaced/repaired 

 

To review lighting arrangements for 

carpark as park of Claypath Medical 

Centre refurbishment plan (see above) 

Tracy Watson 

March, 2012 

ACHIEVED 

107

12 Patient Participation 

Group 

Issue: 


group; 


Patient Reference 

Group 

Need to increase 

membership of 

above 

To promote 

practice Patient 

Participation 

To publicise the Patient Participation 

Group and on-line Patient Reference 

Group at both sites by displaying notices 

and file of previous meetings, etc. 

To review and update the Patient 

Participation Group section of the practice 

website. 

Gillian Bevan 

Gillian Bevan 

Ongoing 

ACHIEVED 

Ongoing 

ACHIEVED 

/GPB 

19 March, 2013 

108

Report - Primary Health Care Online

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?