Enter and view: Five Elms Medical Practice

Healthwatch Barking and Dagenham undertook unannounced enter and view visits to Five Elms Medical Practice on 2 and 6 February 2026. The purpose of the visits was to observe patient experiences and assess access to GP services following a Care Quality Commission rating of “Requires Improvement” in 2020 and ongoing concerns about access to primary care.

Five Elms Medical Practice is a GP surgery serving around 3,500–5,000 patients and is operated by Operose Health as a caretaker provider following a merger with Victoria Medical Practice and organisational changes in October 2025. The practice provides face‑to‑face and telephone appointments, offers interpreter services, and is physically accessible for people with disabilities.

Healthwatch representatives spoke to ten patients across the two visits. Patients generally reported positive experiences with reception staff, with most describing them as friendly, helpful, and skilled, although one patient raised concerns about staff tone and poor communication regarding test results. Most patients felt there was adequate privacy at the reception desk and that the waiting area was comfortable, though a small number felt privacy could be improved.

Booking appointments was a major area of concern. Patients used a mix of phone, online, app‑based, and in‑person booking methods, but many expressed frustration with long phone waiting times, difficulties using the Evergreen app, and unpredictable booking outcomes. Emergency and same‑day appointments were reported as difficult to access by most patients, particularly due to reliance on digital triage systems.

Waiting times for scheduled appointments were mixed. Half of patients felt appointments ran on time, while others experienced delays of up to 30 minutes. Most patients were satisfied with the physical comfort of the waiting area.

Experiences during GP appointments were largely positive. Most patients felt listened to, understood the information provided, trusted their GP, and felt involved in decisions about their care. However, some patients were unhappy about not seeing the same GP consistently and felt this affected continuity of care. A small number felt their consultations were rushed or overly focused on medication without addressing underlying issues.

Referral processes were generally seen as efficient, with most patients receiving clear follow‑up information via text, letter, or phone. Nonetheless, a few patients reported very long waits or lack of communication following referrals, leading in one case to seeking private care.

Repeat prescription services worked well for most patients who used them, although one person reported inconsistencies in medications being issued.

Awareness of complaints procedures was low, with most patients not knowing how to make a complaint. Those who had raised concerns reported mixed experiences, with some issues resolved effectively and others leaving patients dissatisfied with staff responses.

Healthwatch observed that while the practice environment was accessible and informative, posters and complaints information were small and not highly visible, and the absence of a clock in the waiting area could disadvantage patients.

The report makes recommendations to improve transparency around waiting times, increase access to emergency appointments for non‑digital users, strengthen continuity of care, enhance visibility of complaints processes, and maintain the positive aspects of GP care identified by patients.

In its response, Operose Health welcomed the findings, acknowledged the practice was still in a transitional period, clarified governance and access arrangements, and committed to improving complaints awareness, staff support, emergency access, and continuity of care while maintaining positive patient experience.