• Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Bury Knowle Health Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

207 London Road, Oxford, Oxfordshire, OX3 9JA (01865) 227788

Provided and run by:
Bury Knowle Health Centre

All Inspections

We did not visit this practice as part of this inspection

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out a desk top review of Bury Knowle Health Centre in September 2016. We requested information from the practice to be sent to us so we could undertake a review of evidence offsite. This was following a comprehensive inspection in February 2016 where we identified concerns with high numbers of patients not being included in clinical data regarding reviews of their conditions and related treatment. We issued a requirement notice and rated the practice as requires improvement in the effective domain following that inspection. At this inspection we found:

  • The process for exempting patients from data (which practices submit for performance and commission reviews) was changed to encourage more patients to attend for reviews of their health conditions and receive treatment in line with national guidance. We saw the number of patients included in national data submissions had increased, indicating that more patients were receiving the care they needed.

At our last inspection we also asked the provider to consider areas they should make improvements in addition to areas they must improve. At this inspection we found the following action was taken:

  • There had been an increase in learning disability healthcare reviews.
  • Information regarding patient access was improved on the website.
  • A hearing loop was in place for patients with hearing aids.
  • A review of how to improve breast and bowel cancer screening had taken place.
  • The practice had worked towards increasing flu vaccination rates and child immunisation uptake.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

9 February 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Bury Knowle Health Centre on 9 February 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good. However, there are improvements required in providing effective services.

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.
  • Medicines were managed safely.
  • 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.
  • National data suggested patients received their care in line with national guidance. However, there were high levels of exception reporting compared to national and local averages and this had not been fully explored by the practice.
  • 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.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a 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.
  • 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.
  • Governance arrangements were in place for non-clinical aspects of the service.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice led on a pilot project to improve holistic care for patients with complex conditions. A ‘social prescriber’ was employed by the practice as part of a practice initiative, supported by the local clinical commissioning group, to target high need and vulnerable populations in two deprived wards within the practice catchment area. This role supported patients who may need various support from the community. For example, staff were concerned about one elderly patient who had become insecure and disorientated in their own home. The social prescriber was able to speak with various support agencies and the patient had additional support which may not have been identified without the intervention, leading to greater independence and peace of mind for the patient. The practice provided nine case studies where the social prescriber had made an impact on patient care. A total of 62 patients had been identified and attended the service between July and December 2015.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Identify causes of exception reporting, ensure that patients are only exempted when appropriate and reduce exception reporting where possible.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Consider purchasing a hearing aid loop.
  • Review the uptake of learning disability health checks to improve the low uptake.
  • Ensure patients are made aware how they could access GP services during usual practice contracted hours when the practice is not open. Namely 8-8.30am and 6-6.30pm.
  • Review and identify means of improving uptake of bowel cancer and breast screening, child immunisations and flu vaccination rates.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

14 July 2014

During a routine inspection

Bury Knowle Health Centre has a patient population of approximately 14,000. It is located on two sites in East Oxford.

We spoke with 24 patients during the inspection and received feedback from five patients on comment cards sent to the practice before the inspection. Patients were complimentary about the care and support they received from the practice. They praised the attitude of staff. There were concerns raised about the appointment booking system.

The practice provided safe care to patients. The practice was well maintained, clean and hygienic. Some risks associated with management of the premises were not assessed or managed properly. The practice was not appropriately monitoring all staff records or all the training required by staff.

Patient care was effective. National guidance and research was followed by staff and managed through a system of clinical governance. Long term conditions and the screening of specific conditions in patients over 45 years old took place as part of the practice’s health promotion. New patient health checks did not take place unless the practice was made aware of specific concerns. Patients with long term conditions and mental health problems had access to services which were promoted or delivered by the practice.

The practice enabled patients to see or speak with GPs and nurses through its telephone consultation system. Patients voiced some concerns with this system. They told us they found it difficult to receive calls for a GP phone consultation because the calls were either not at a set time or not at a time which allowed them to answer. This was particularly difficult for patients who worked or who had commitments which meant they could not take a telephone call at any time. There was some positive feedback regarding short phone waiting times. The practice was responsive to the needs of some patients groups who may be in vulnerable circumstances, such as patients with drug and alcohol addictions.

Patients told us the practice was caring. They said staff were courteous, respectful and spent the time they needed with patients to provide the care they needed.

Physical access to the practice was good. Patients complimented the layout of the premises saying it provided a friendly and accessible environment, although some raised concerns about privacy at the reception desk.

There was an open culture which encouraged learning and communication between all the staff working at the practice. There were regular meetings to discuss patient care and information related to the management of the practice.

We found that the practice was not meeting two regulations required to ensure that standards of quality and safety were maintained. This was in relation to assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision and supporting workers. We have asked the practice to send us a report, setting out the action they will take to meet these safety standards. We will check to make sure that action is taken.

During our inspection we looked at how well services are provided for specific groups of people and what good care looks like for them. The population groups we reviewed were:

•      Older people

•      People with long-term conditions

•      Mothers, babies, children and young people

•      The working-age population and those recently retired

•      People in vulnerable circumstances who may have poor access to primary care

•      People experiencing a mental health problem

We found the practice was responsive to the needs of older patients, vulnerable groups, patients with mental health problems and mothers with young children. Patients who worked told us they found it difficult to use the phone consultation system to book appointments. The practice ensured the clinical outcomes for all of these population groups were good.