Holland Park Surgery

Updated 20 February 2017

Holland Park Surgery provides GP primary medical services to approximately 8,649 patients living in the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The practice population was predominantly patients of 19-65 years of age from diverse ethnic backgrounds.

The practice team is made up three GP partners(two female and one male); four female and two male salaried GPs; three trainee GPs; three practice nurses; two Health Care Assistants; a practice manager, a strategy manager; seven receptionists and five administrative staff. The GPs provide 56 sessions per week.

The practice is open between 8am-8pm on Monday and 8pm-6:30pm Tuesday to Friday. Appointments are from 9am-2pm and 3pm-8pm on Monday; 9am-2pm and 3pm-5.30pm on Tuesday; 8:15am-2pm and 3pm-5:45pm on Wednesday; 8:15am-2pm and 3pm-5:30pm on Thursday; 10am-2pm and 3pm-5:30pm on Friday. Home visits are provided for patients who are housebound or too ill to visit the practice.

The practice has a Primary Medical Services (PMS) contract (PMS is one of the three contracting routes that have been available to enable the commissioning of primary medical services).The practice refers patients to the ‘London Central West’ service for healthcare advice during out of hours.

The practice is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the regulated activities of maternity and midwifery services; diagnostic and screening procedures; treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

The practice provides a range of services including maternity care, childhood immunisations, chronic disease management and travel immunisations.

Updated 20 February 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Holland Park Surgery 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.

• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment 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.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Ensure all staff receive training in infection control.

• Ensure all staff receive basic life support training on an annual basis.

• Take action to improve the percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who have a comprehensive, agreed care plan; and the percentage of patients diagnosed with dementia whose care has been reviewed in a face to face review.

• Consider improving communication with patients who have a hearing impairment.

• Improve its identification of patients who are carers. 

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 20 February 2017

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.

• Performance for diabetes related indicators were in line with the national averages. For example, the percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, whose last measured total cholesterol was 5 mmol/l or less was 79% which was comparable to the national average of 81%; and the percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, who received a foot examination, was 87% which was comparable to the 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.

Updated 20 February 2017

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.

• Childhood immunisation rates for the vaccinations given were comparable to CCG/national averages.

• Children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals.

• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 74% which was below the national average of 82%.

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

Updated 20 February 2017

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.

• Patients over 65 years of age had a named GP and were invited to receive flu immunisations each year.

Updated 20 February 2017

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.

Updated 20 February 2017

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

• • Performance for some mental health related indicators were below the national averages. For example, the percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive, agreed care plan was 64% and the national average is 88%.

  • The percentage of patients diagnosed with dementia whose care had been reviewed in a face to face review in the preceding 12 months was 76% which was below the national average of 84%.

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

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

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

Updated 20 February 2017

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 homeless people and 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.