Cherry Medical Practice

Updated 7 June 2017

Cherry Medical Practice is located in Salford. The address of the practice is Little Hulton District Centre, Manchester, Salford, M28 0AY. The practice has limited parking facilities but has good public transport links with bus stops nearby. The practice shares its premises with another registered provider.

The practice is a partnership of two female GPs. The practice employs a practice nurse (female), a practice manager, and a team of administration staff.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 9am to 11.10am in the morning and 3pm to 5.20pm in the evening. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that can be booked up to six weeks in advance, urgent appointments are also available for people that needed them.

Outside of opening hours, patients are directed to the NHS 111 out of hour’s service.

The practice has approximately 2500 patients and operates under a personal medical services (PMS) contract and is part of NHS Salford Clinical Commissioning Group. The age group of the patients at the practice is similar to that of the national average but with a slightly higher than average amount for people ages 20-29.

Updated 7 June 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Cherry Medical Practice on 19 May 2017. 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events, however not all were reported and discussed at practice meetings
• The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
• Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
• Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients we spoke with 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 the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• The practice should report all significant events and discuss these at practice meetings.
• The practice should keep a log of all prescriptions that are used.
• The business continuity plan should contain contact numbers for staff.
• They should provide written care plans for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) informing them how to use their rescue medications.
• The practice should adopt the NICE Sepsis guidelines.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 7 June 2017

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

• Nursing staff had lead roles in long-term disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.
• The practice followed up on patients with long-term conditions discharged from hospital and ensured that their care plans were updated to reflect any additional needs.
• There were emergency processes for patients with long-term conditions who experienced a sudden deterioration in health.
• All these patients had a named GP and there was a system to recall patients for 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 7 June 2017

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

• From the sample of documents we reviewed we found there were systems 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 accident and emergency (A&E) attendances.
• Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.

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

• The practice had emergency processes for acutely ill children and young people and for acute pregnancy complications.

Updated 7 June 2017

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

• Staff were able to recognise the signs of abuse in older patients and knew how to escalate any concerns.
• The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older patients in its population.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.
• The practice identified at an early stage older patients who may need palliative care as they were approaching the end of life. It involved older patients in planning and making decisions about their care, including their end of life care.
• The practice followed up on older patients discharged from hospital and ensured that their care plans were updated to reflect any extra needs. The practice also offered a ‘virtual ward’ service to patients that may need extra support to prevent readmittance into hospital.

Updated 7 June 2017

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

• The needs of this population group had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible, flexible and offered continuity of care, for example, extended opening hours and Saturday appointments.
• 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 flexible appointments so people could attend before or after working hours.

Updated 7 June 2017

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

• The practice carried out advance care planning for patients living with dementia.
• 100% of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which was above the CCG and national average of 84%
• The practice had a system for monitoring repeat prescribing for patients receiving medicines for mental health needs.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those living with dementia.
• Patients at risk of dementia were identified and offered an assessment.
• The practice had information available for patients experiencing poor mental health about how they could access various support groups and voluntary organisations.
• The practice had a system to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.
• Staff interviewed had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 7 June 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 asylum seekers.
• End of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of those whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.
• 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 had information available for vulnerable patients about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.
• Staff interviewed knew how to recognise signs of abuse in children, young people and adults whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. They 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.