Canterbury Medical Practice Also known as Bridge and Littlebourne Medical Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Canterbury Medical Practice on 13 December 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 for reporting and recording significant events. There was a positive attitude towards reporting events with substantial numbers of reported events from across all the teams working in the practice.

• 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 experience, and had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge, 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.
• 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 areas of outstanding practice:

• There was a small but increasing contingent of refugees and asylum seekers with on the practice list. There was a lead GP and lead nurse appointed to manage their needs which were recognised as being both physical and psychological.

• All correspondence of any patient less than 18 years old was scrutinised by the lead GP for safeguarding to help promote an holistic approach to family care. The practice had developed a contraceptive template for prescribing for patients aged under 18. This included an assessment of competence.

• There was a quarterly governance report. It summarised significant events, complaints, changes to national and local guidance (including changes to referral pathways) and audits.

• Patients with care plans, in addition to a named GP, had a named nurse and a named administrator. The latter was a point of contact for the patient, and being typically more readily available to the patients, than clinicians, they passed on messages and arranged clinical contacts or reviews.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice