Woodlands Park Health Centre

Updated 13 October 2017

Woodlands Park Medical Centre is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide primary care services. The practice is located in Wideopen and provides primary medical services to patients living in Wideopen, Seaton Burn, Hazlerigg and parts of North Gosforth and Dudley. The practice provides services to around 5,300 patients from:

• Woodlands Park Medical Centre, Canterbury Way, Wide Open, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE13 6JJ.

This is a purpose built premises in the centre of Wideopen. There is on-site parking and disabled parking. A disabled WC is accessible.

The practice has three partners and one salaried GP (one male and three female). The practice also currently has a female junior doctor on placement with the practice. The practice employs a practice manager, nurse prescriber, healthcare assistant and eight staff who undertake administrative roles. The practice provides services based on a General Medical Services (GMS) contact.

The practice is an approved training practice where qualified doctors gain experience in general practice.

The surgery is open from 8:30am to 6pm Monday to Friday; it is closed from 12:30pm until 2pm each Tuesday for staff training. The telephones are answered by the practice during these times. When the practice is closed patients are directed to the NHS 111 service. This information is available from the practices telephone message and the practice website.

Appointments are available at the following times:

• Monday 8:30am to 11:45am and 1:45pm to 5:30pm
• Tuesday 8:30am to 11:30am and 2pm to 5:30pm
• Wednesday 8:30am to 12:20pm and 1pm to 5:20pm
• Thursday 8:30am to 11:45am and 1:45pm to 5:30pm
• Friday 8:30am to 11:45am and 1:45pm to 5:30pm

The practice is part of NHS North Tyneside clinical commissioning group (CCG). Information from Public Health England placed the area in which the practice is located in the seventh least deprived decile of ten. In general, people living in more deprived areas tend to have greater need for health services. The practice’s age population is weighted towards people over the age of 60 and 12.4% of patients are over the age of 75.

The service for patients requiring urgent medical care out of hours is provided by the NHS 111 service and Vocare (known locally as Northern Doctors Urgent Care Limited).

Updated 13 October 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Woodlands Park Health Centre on 3 December 2015. The overall rating for the practice was good; but was requires improvement for providing caring services. The full comprehensive report on the December 2015 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Woodlands Park Health Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 7 September 2017 to review in detail the actions taken by the practice to improve the quality of care.

The practice is rated as good overall including for providing caring services.

Our key findings at this inspection were as follows:

The practice had addressed the issues identified during the previous inspection.

• The latest published National GP Patient Survey showed that patients’ scores for how they were treated with kindness, dignity, respect and compassion had increased.
• The survey showed that scores had mostly improved for how patients felt about being involved in care planning and in involvement in decisions about their care and treatment.
• The practice had implemented an action plan to address the lower scores in the survey.
• CQC comment cards completed by patients were positive about the standard of care received.

• Staff were to receive care navigator training and the practice had been more proactive in identifying carers and giving them information about help available to them.

At our previous inspection on 3 December 2015 we said the provider should make improvements in several areas. We saw at this inspection that improvements had been made;

• Staff had received mandatory training and this was closely monitored using an internal computer software package which provided prompts for the practice manager and staff when training was due.
• There were no longer any risks associated with transporting medicines to the branch surgery as this had closed in May 2017.
• Complaints were managed in line with the practice’s complaints policy.

There were areas where the provider still needed to make improvements. At our previous inspection in December 2015 there was limited evidence that clinical audits were used to improve quality outcomes for patients. At this inspection we saw that there was an audit plan in place and some audits were supplied, however there were no two cycle audits. The audits supplied had no clear aims nor were preparation or planning described.

Therefore the provider should:

• Carry out clearly defined clinical audit which is clearly linked to patient outcomes, monitored for effectiveness and comprises of two cycles to monitor improvements to patient outcomes.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 4 February 2016

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.
• Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients with long term conditions were good. For example, the practice had achieved 100% of the QOF points available for providing the recommended care and treatment for patients with diabetes. This was above the local CCG average of 92.9% and above the national average of 89.2%.
• The practice had introduced an enhanced service for diabetic patients that included personalised care plans that was also delivered to housebound patients. This ensured housebound patients received the same standard of care as patients who were able to access the surgery.
• The practice had introduced a diabetes diagnostic tool to aid the diagnosis of diabetes in patients with other long term conditions
• 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 4 February 2016

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

• There were processes in place for the regular assessment of children’s development. This included the early identification of problems and the timely follow up of these. Systems were in place for identifying and following-up children who were considered to be at-risk of harm or neglect. For example, the needs of all at-risk children were regularly reviewed at practice multidisciplinary meetings involving child care professionals such as health visitors.
• Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients with asthma were good. For example, the practice had achieved 100% of the QOF points available for providing the recommended care and treatment for patients with asthma. This was above the local CCG average of 97.6% and above the national average of 97.4%.
• 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.
• The practice’s uptake for cervical screening was 87% which was above the local CCG average of 83.1% and the national average of 81.8%.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. However, it was difficult to access the reception area with a pushchair. The practice was aware of this and planned to refurbish the reception area.
• Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations. For example, childhood immunisation rates for the vaccinations given to under two year olds ranged from 95.8% to 100% (CCG average 97.3% to 100%) and for five year olds ranged from 87% to 96.3% (CCG average 92.2% to 97.9%).
• We saw good examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 4 February 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.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.
• Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients for conditions commonly found in older people were good. For example, the practice had achieved 100% of the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) points available for providing the recommended care and treatment for patients with heart failure. This was similar to the local clinical commissioning group (CCG) average of 99.9% and above the national average of 97.9%.
• The percentage of people aged 65 or over who received a seasonal flu vaccination was 78.4%, which was above the local CCG average of 73.2%. For at risk groups the practice rate was 60.5% (CCG average 52.3%).

Updated 4 February 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.
• Patients could order repeat prescriptions and book appointments on-line. Appointments could also be booked using a downloadable ‘app’. Text message appointment reminders were available. Telephone appointments were available.
• The practice offered a full range of health promotion and screening which reflected the needs for this age group.
• Additional services such as health checks for over 40’s and travel vaccinations were provided.
• The practice website provided a wide range of health promotion advice and information.

Updated 4 February 2016

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

• 87.3% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is above the national average of 84%.
• Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients with mental health conditions were good. For example, the practice had achieved 100% of the QOF points available for providing the recommended care and treatment for patients with mental health conditions. This was above the local CCG average of 95.2% and the national average of 92.8%.
• Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients with dementia were good. For example, the practice had achieved 100% of the QOF points available for providing the recommended care and treatment for patients with dementia. This was above the local CCG average of 96.8% and the national average of 94.5%.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people 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 4 February 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 those with a learning disability.
• The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability if required.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. For example, we saw that the practice had worked with the local learning disability team.
• 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. However, the safeguarding lead had not undertaken up-to-date level three safeguarding training. The practice had recognised this training as a priority.
• Good arrangements were in place to support patients who were carers. The practice had systems in place for identifying carers and ensuring that they were offered a health check.