Archived: Church Road

Updated 19 January 2017

Church road is located in a purpose built health centre with two other practices in a residential area with good transport links. There is a staff car park that also has allocated parking spaces for disabled patients. The practice has been managed by Lantern Health for four years and is a part of Newham Clinical Commissioning Group.

There are 7000 patients registered at the practice, which has grown from 3500 in four years. The practice has roughly 18% more patients aged 20 to 39 than the England average.

The practice has three female salaried GPs and one male regular locum carrying out 29 sessions a week, two contracted nurses carrying out a total of 10 sessions per week and a health care assistant carrying out six sessions per week. The practice has four management team members, and fifteen reception/administration staff members.

The practice operates under an Alternative Provider Medical Services (APMS) contract (a locally negotiated contract open to both NHS practices and voluntary sector or private providers e.g. many walk-in centres).

The practice is open Monday to Friday between 8:00am and 6:30pm. The phone lines are answered from 8:00am and appointment times are as follows:

• Monday 9:00am to 12:45pm and 2:00pm to 6:00pm

• Tuesday 9:00am to 12:45pm and 2:00pm to 5:10pm

• Wednesday 8:00am to 12:45pm and 2:00pm to 5:10pm

• Thursday 8:00am to 12:45pm and 2:00pm to 5:00pm

• Friday 8:30am to 12:45pm and 2:00pm to 6:00pm

  The locally agreed out of hours provider covers calls made to the practice whilst it is closed.

  Church road operates regulated activities from one location and is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide treatment of disease, disorder or injury, diagnostic and screening procedures, maternity and midwifery services and family planning services.

Updated 19 January 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Church Road on 6 September 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
• There was no evidence of completed audit cycles.
• The Patient Participation Group was not well established.
• Results from the GP Patient Survey were lower than the national averages in several areas of care.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Review system of clinical audits to ensure that re-audits are carried out to demonstrate quality improvement.

• Continue to work to establish an active PPG to involve patients and gain their views.

• Continue to work and engage with patients to improve patient satisfaction including satisfaction with access to the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 19 January 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions.

• Nursing staff had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

• The percentage of patients on the diabetes register with a record of a foot examination and risk classification in the preceding 12 months was 91% compared with the national average of 88%.

• The practice employed a pharmacist to review patients with asthma and hypertension.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

• All these patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For those patients with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 19 January 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of families, children and young people.

• There were systems in place to identify and follow up children living in disadvantaged circumstances and who were at risk, for example, children and young people who had a high number of A&E attendances. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.

• Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals, and we saw evidence to confirm this.

• 81% of women aged 25 to 64 had a record of a cervical screening test documented in their record in the preceding five years, which was similar to the national average of 82%.

• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 19 January 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.

• The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population.

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

• 75% of patients in a nursing home were given a structured review to holistically assess their needs.

Updated 19 January 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students).

• The needs of the working age population, those recently retired and students had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible, flexible and offered continuity of care.

• The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflects the needs for this age group.

• The practice was a part of the local HUB, which provided weekday evenings and weekend GP appointments.

Updated 19 January 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

• 89% of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average of 84%.

• The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychosis who had an agreed comprehensive care plan documented in the record in the preceding 12 months was 85% compared to the national average of 88%.

• The practice offered longer appointments for patients experiencing poor mental health.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.

• The practice carried out advance care planning for patients with dementia.

• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

• The practice had a system in place to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.

• Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 19 January 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.

• The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people and those with a learning disability.

• The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.

• The practice regularly worked with other health care professionals in the case management of vulnerable patients.

• The practice informed vulnerable patients about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

• Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse in vulnerable adults and children. Staff were aware of their responsibilities regarding information sharing, documentation of safeguarding concerns and how to contact relevant agencies in normal working hours and out of hours.