Archived: New Hall Surgery

Updated 14 April 2016

New Hall Surgery is situated in the north west of Hull City and provides services under a General Medical Services (GMS) contract with NHS England, Hull Area Team to the practice population of 9,400, covering patients of all ages.

The practice has two full time and two part time GP partners (two male and two female) and four salaried GPs (two male and two female). There are three practice nurses and one health care assistant. There is an executive manager, practice manager, and a team of secretarial, administration and reception staff.

The practice is open between 8.30am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Early and late appointments are available from 7.30am to 8.00am on Wednesdays and 6.30pm to 8pm on Thursdays. The practice, along with all other practices in the Hull CCG area have a contractual agreement for NHS 111 service to provide Out of Hours (OOHs) services from 6.30pm. This has been agreed with the NHS England area team. Information for patients requiring urgent medical attention out of hours is available in the waiting area, in the practice information leaflet and on the practice website.

The proportion of the practice population in the 20-30 years age group is higher than the England average. The practice population in the 39-49 age group is significantly lower than the England average. The practice scored three on the deprivation measurement scale, which is the third lowest deprived. People living in more deprived areas tend to have greater need for health services. The overall practice deprivation score is higher than the England average, the practice is 32.5 and the England average is 23.6. The practice provides care for 25% of its patient list that is in an area of Hull that is the 5th most deprived area of England.

Updated 14 April 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at New Hall Surgery on 26 January 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.

• The practice responded and was engaged with notable local groups and stakeholders. For example the Alzheimer’s Society Pilot scheme, local care homes and leading on the confederation of six local practices.

• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had 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. Discussions with staff and feedback from patients’ demonstrated staff were highly motivated and were inspired to offer care that was kind, caring and supportive and that met the needs of the population.

• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.

• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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.

• Leadership was reflective at the practice and involved the whole team in a cohesive way, which provided strong and decisive decision making around patient care.

• Although already achieving high outcomes in a number of areas, the practice team wished to improve their services and the experience of patients. They actively explored ways in which to do this.

• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour. This means providers must be open and transparent with service users about their care and treatment, including when it goes wrong.

We saw some areas of outstanding practice including:

• A named GP was responsible for specialist dementia related conditions and spent a period of time working with local care homes to review patients with a dementia diagnosis; including, medication reviews, health checks and referrals. Feedback from four Care home managers was positive regarding this arrangement and they welcomed the direct support from the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 14 April 2016

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

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

• Nationally reported data for 2014/2015 showed that outcomes for patients with long term conditions were good.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

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

Updated 14 April 2016

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.

• Nationally reported data from 2014/2015 showed patients diagnosed with asthma, on the register, who had an asthma review in the last 12 months was 82.6%, which was 6.8% above the local CCG average and 7.3% above the national average.

• 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.

• Nationally reported data from 2014/2015 showed the practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 82.8%, which was 1% above the local CCG average and 1% above the national average. 

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

Updated 14 April 2016

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.

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

Updated 14 April 2016

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 reflected the needs for this age group.

Updated 14 April 2016

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

• Nationally reported data from 2014/2015 showed 84.6% of people diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months. This was 4.7% above the local CCG average and 4.5% above the national average.

• Nationally reported data from 2014/2015 showed the percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive care plan documented in their record, in the preceding 12 months was 89.3%. This was 1.1% above the local CCG average and 1% above the national average.  

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

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

• It 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 people with mental health needs and dementia. A named GP was responsible for specialist dementia related conditions and spent a period of time working with local care homes to review patients with a dementia diagnosis; including, medication reviews, health checks and referrals. Care home staff felt well supported and welcomed the direct support from GPs.

Updated 14 April 2016

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, travellers and those with a learning disability.

• It offered longer appointments for people with a learning disability.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people.

• It had told vulnerable patients about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

• Patients received a two hour call back response time using the practice ring back system and on-call duty GP and a quicker time was available for more vulnerable patient groups.

• 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.