You are here

Archived: Whitechapel Health Centre Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Whitechapel Health Centre on 19 April 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.
  • The practice had a 0% exception reporting rate.
  • The practice had an in-house Bengali translator that managed the recall system and translated for the patient participation group.
  • 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 in different languages 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.
  • To engage hard to reach patients on the topic of mental health, the practice worked with a charity to produce a video to tackle the issues, this video was shared with 50 practices, translated into three different languages and is used as a training tool by seven NHS trusts.

We saw an area of outstanding practice

  • Due to the practice having a low proportion of patients completing bowel screening tests, reception staff were trained to use bowel screening kits and the practice produced a video in Bengali, which was shared with other practices in the borough of Tower Hamlets with a high population of Bengali speaking patients that explained how to use the kits and the reason behind the testing. This video was played in the waiting area and a link to the video was on the practice website. Reception staff would phone all patients who had not completed the bowel screening and spoke them through the process as well as explaining the importance of the test.

The area the practice should make improvement is:

  • Work to improve the GP patient satisfaction scores.

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing safe services.

  • There was an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events

  • Lessons were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice.

  • When things went wrong patients received reasonable support, truthful information, and a written apology. They were told about any actions to improve processes to prevent the same thing happening again.

  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems, processes and practices in place to keep patients safe and safeguarded from abuse.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

Effective

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing effective services.

  • Data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) showed patient outcomes were at or above average compared to the national average.

  • The practice produced and shared a video in Bengali on the reasons behind bowel screening and how to use the bowel screening kits.

  • The practice employed an interpreter who carried out patient recalls via a telephone call in the language of the patient’s choice.

  • Staff assessed needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.

  • Clinical audits demonstrated quality improvement.

  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • There was evidence of appraisals and personal development plans for all staff.

  • Staff worked with other health care professionals to understand and meet the range and complexity of patients’ needs.

Caring

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing caring services.

  • Data from the national GP patient survey showed patients rated the practice higher than others for several aspects of care.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.

  • Information for patients about the services available was easy to understand and accessible.

  • We saw staff treated patients with kindness and respect, and maintained patient and information confidentiality.

Responsive

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing responsive services.

  • Practice staff reviewed the needs of its local population and engaged with the NHS England Area Team and Clinical Commissioning Group to secure improvements to services where these were identified. This included securing an in-house multilingual phlebotomist to make blood tests more convenient for patients who found attending other clinics difficult and whose first language was not English.

  • 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.

  • Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand, available in other languages and evidence showed the practice responded quickly to issues raised. Learning from complaints was shared with staff and other stakeholders.

Well-led

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for being well-led.

  • The practice had a clear vision and strategy to deliver high quality care and promote good outcomes for patients. Staff were clear about the vision and their responsibilities in relation to it.

  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity and held regular governance meetings.

  • There was an overarching governance framework which supported the delivery of the strategy and good quality care. This included arrangements to monitor and improve quality and identify risk.

  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour. The partners encouraged a culture of openness and honesty. The practice had systems in place for notifiable safety incidents and ensured this information was shared with staff to ensure appropriate action was taken.

  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on. The patient participation group was active.

  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels.

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions.

  • Nursing staff had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

  • Patients received a telephone reminder of their nurse appointment on the morning of their appointment.

  • Recall was carried out by an interpreter to ensure that patients understood the importance of their appointments.

  • The percentage of patients on the diabetes register with a record of a foot examination and risk classification in the preceding 12 months was 96% compared with a national average of 88%.

  • Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

  • All these patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For those patients with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of families, children and young people.

  • There were systems in place to identify and follow up children living in disadvantaged circumstances and who were at risk, for example, children and young people who had a high number of A&E attendances. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.

  • Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals, and we saw evidence to confirm this.

  • 83% of women aged 25 to 64 had a record of a cervical screening test documented in their record in the preceding five years compared to 82% nationally.

  • Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

  • We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Older people

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.

  • The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population.

  • The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

  • The practice was a part of the Everyone Counts Scheme, which focuses on patients aged over 75 years old.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students).

  • The needs of the working age population, those recently retired and students had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible, flexible and offered continuity of care.

  • The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflects the needs for this age group.

  • The practice offered extended hours four days a week and was open on a Saturday for patients who were unable to attend the practice during normal working hours.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

  • 89% of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average of 84%.

  • The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychosis who have a comprehensive agreed care plan documented in the record was 84% compared to a national average of 88%.

  • The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.

  • The practice carried out advance care planning for patients with dementia.

  • The practice told patients experiencing poor mental health how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

  • The practice worked with a local charity to make a video advising patients of mental health issues, which was translated into other languages and shared with other practices and NHS trusts.

  • The practice had a system in place to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.

  • Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

  • Patients received a telephone reminder of their appointment on the morning that they were due to be seen.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 17 November 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.

  • The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including those with a learning disability.

  • The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.

  • The practice regularly worked with other health care professionals in the case management of vulnerable patients.

  • The practice informed vulnerable patients about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

  • Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse in vulnerable adults and children. Staff were aware of their responsibilities regarding information sharing, documentation of safeguarding concerns and how to contact relevant agencies in normal working hours and out of hours.