• Doctor
  • GP practice

Addison House - Haque Practice Also known as Addison House Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Addison House Surgery, Hamstel Road, Harlow, Essex, CM20 1DS (01279) 621900

Provided and run by:
Addison House - Haque Practice

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 6 September 2019

Addison House - Haque Practice provides GP services to approximately 16,000 patients who live in Harlow and on the outskirts of Roydon. It is located in a purpose-built location at Hamstel Road, Harlow.

The practice population is ethnically diverse. It is on the fourth most deprived decile on the Index of multiple deprivation decile and the life expectancy of male and female patients in lower than the CCG average by three years.

The practice is provided by a partnership consisting of three full time partners. They are supported by a practice manager, assistant practice manager, two salaried GPs and two permanent locum GPs. There are three advanced nurse practitioners, two practice nurses, two health care assistants and a pharmacist employed, as well as a number of administrative assistants, receptionists and secretaries.

Addison House – Haque practice is in the process of merging with another practice in the locality.

We previously carried out a comprehensive inspection on 4th June 2018. This was a comprehensive inspection. At that inspection, we rated the practice as good overall, with safe and rated as requires improvement.

Since that inspection, the practice list size increased, partly due to a number of new patient registrations from ‘Permitted Development Rights’ residents. These patients have been relocated from London and other areas to converted office blocks in Harlow.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 6 September 2019

We carried out an announced inspection at Addison House – Haque Practice on 30 July 2019.

This was to follow up on a breach identified at our previous inspection on 4 June 2018 and also to undertake an inspection of this service following our annual review of the information available to us. At our previous inspection, we found that there were not effective systems to manage patient safety alerts nor patients prescribed some medicines that require additional monitoring.

This inspection looked at the following key questions:

  • Safe
  • Effective
  • Well-led

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups, except for providing effective services for working age people (including those recently retired and students). This is because data continued to be low in respect of cervical cancer screening.

We found that:

  • Necessary improvements had been made. There were now systems to manage patient safety alerts and review patients prescribed lithium and other high-risk medicines.
  • Improvements continued to be made in respect of QOF performance and exception reporting.
  • Improvements had been made in respect of one antibiotic prescribing indicator, although there had been an upward trend in another which related to prescribing certain antibiotics for uncomplicated urinary tract infection.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs; exception reporting and overall QOF performance had improved since our previous inspection.
  • Cervical screening rates remained low despite relevant actions being taken.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to review and improve antibiotic prescribing
  • Improve uptake for cervical screening
  • Continue to monitor and improve lower levels of patient satisfaction in the GP patient survey, specifically in relation to the involvement with healthcare professionals

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care