Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Outwood Park Medical Centre on 12 July 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.
• 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.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• The practice had recognised that many of their most vulnerable patients were unable to attend either their main or branch surgeries. This meant that they often required home visits and therefore received reactive rather than proactive health care. In response to this the practice had commissioned another local health and care provider to deliver a patient transport service which would pick up the patient from home and then take them back home post consultation/treatment. Calls for this service were triaged by a GP in a similar way to calls for home visits. Between the launch of the service on 4 July 2016 and 27 July 2016 the service had been used by 36 patients and satisfaction with the service was reported to be high.

There were areas where the provider should make improvements:

• The practice should consider the provision of a defibrillator at the branch surgery, or undertake a formal risk assessment as to how to manage emergency situations with the equipment currently available. In addition, the practice should ensure that all staff are aware of the action they should take in event of an emergency occurring in either of the surgeries.

• The practice should consider carrying out a full health and safety risk assessment in relation to their patient transport service.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Patients expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. Patients were given information and support regarding their treatment options.

We spoke with 10 patients who were satisfied with the care and treatment they received. One patient said; “They’ve been brilliant.” Another patient told us; “They’re good.” One patient told us they had regular reviews of their care and treatment, when they required.

The practice had clear information about how to safeguard children and vulnerable adults. The 10 members of staff we spoke with were clear on what to do if they suspected abuse was happening.

The practice had a recruitment policy and protocol in place to guide staff on the recruitment process. We saw staff had job descriptions which made clear their role and responsibilities.

Audits of infection control, clinical audits and the national Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) were carried out as a way of checking and improving working practices.