Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Burbage Surgery on 29 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 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.
• The patient participation group (PPG) were well engaged and represented across a diverse range of ages and backgrounds. The PPG suggestions for changes to the practice management team had been acted upon and as well as this, the group had raised awareness about patient services.
• 100% of patients diagnosed with dementia had had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which was better than both the clinical commissioning group (CCG) average of 86% and national average of 84%.
• The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in their records in the preceding 12 months was 100%, which was better than the national average of 88%.
• 99% of patients said they could get through easily to the practice by phone (national average 73%).
• The practice was proactive in ensuring that vulnerable patients who did not attend their scheduled appointments were contacted by the practice nurse, assessed and if necessary booked for a same day appointment at the practice.
• 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.
• When there were unintended or unexpected safety incidents, patients received reasonable support, truthful information, a verbal and written apology and were told about any actions to improve processes to prevent the same thing happening again.
• The practice hosts a talking therapy service on one afternoon per week, for patients who have experienced a bereavement, were carers, or were experiencing mental health issues. The service is funded by the local clinical commissioning group (CCG) and available on referral.
• The practice offers a ‘community clinic’ run by a nurse and GP, for patients with complex medical needs. Patients are allotted one hour, during which time their medical condition is reviewed and managed, and they are screened for dementia.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice