Red House Medical Centre Patient feedback April 2026
Download (PDF 514.98 KB)Summary of report content
Healthwatch Sunderland conducted a patient feedback exercise at Red House Medical Centre after the practice sought support to understand concerns highlighted in the national GP Patient Survey, particularly around access to appointments and patient involvement in care. Healthwatch gathered feedback through surveys, conversations with patients in the waiting area, and an online survey, receiving 43 responses in total.
Overall, the report found that patients generally viewed the practice positively, although there were recurring concerns about consistency of access and communication.
Patients found visiting the surgery in person to be the easiest way to make contact, with nearly four-fifths rating this method as easy or very easy. Telephone access received more mixed feedback, with around one-third of patients describing it as difficult or very difficult because of long waiting times and limitations within the phone system. E-consult was viewed positively by many respondents, who described it as easy to use and responsive. However, almost half of respondents were unaware that the practice offered a website chatbot service.
Most patients reported satisfactory access to appointments. More than half said they were able to secure an appointment either on the same day or within one to two days, while others reported waiting longer, particularly for non-urgent appointments. Many respondents felt the waiting times were appropriate because urgent cases were usually seen quickly.
Patients generally rated their overall experience of contacting the practice positively. Over 60% described their experience as good or very good, and three-quarters said they were clear or very clear about what would happen next after contacting the surgery. However, some patients remained uncertain about the next steps following contact.
Feedback about reception staff was largely positive. Most respondents described receptionists as welcoming, helpful, cheerful, and willing to assist. More than 80% said reception staff were always or usually welcoming and helpful. However, some patients reported inconsistent experiences depending on which staff member they spoke to, with a small number describing interactions as abrupt or patronising.
Experiences of appointments were also generally positive. Most patients said they felt involved in decisions about their care and felt listened to by healthcare professionals. Patients frequently praised clinicians for explaining things clearly and providing helpful advice. Nevertheless, some respondents felt appointments could feel rushed, that communication varied between clinicians, and that medical jargon was not always easy to understand.
Additional comments reflected a mixture of positive and negative experiences. Many patients described the practice as friendly, supportive, and responsive to their needs. Others raised concerns about long waits for some appointments, difficulties accessing services when required, communication problems when systems were unavailable, and a desire for wider support services and improvements.
Healthwatch concluded that the practice’s strengths include accessible face-to-face contact, the successful use of e-consult, friendly and professional staff, and good access to urgent appointments. Areas for improvement include reducing inconsistencies in booking experiences, increasing awareness of alternative access routes such as the chatbot and e-consult, providing better information about appointment options and peak times, and improving consistency and clarity in communication during appointments.