Dr Mehboob Bhatti Also known as Sutton Road Surgery

Updated 22 September 2016

• Dr Mehboob Bhatti’s practice also known as Sutton Road Surgery is located in Erdington, Birmingham and has approximately 2400 registered patients.
• The practice has one full-time male GP and one regular part-time female (regular) locum GP. There is a female practice nurse, a practice manager and three reception/administrative staff.
• The practice has a General Medical Services (GMS) contract. A GMS contract is a contract between NHS England and general practices for delivering general medical services.
• The practice is open between 9am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday except for Wednesday afternoons when the practice closes at 12.45pm. Appointments take place from 9am to 11.30am every morning and 4pm to 5.50pm daily (except on Wednesdays). The practice offers extended hours on Thursday s from 6.30pm to 8pm. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that can be booked up to two weeks in advance, urgent appointments are also available for people that need them.
• Out-of-hours services for patients are provided through Birmingham and District General Practitioner Emergency Rooms (BADGER) medical service. Patients are directed to this service via the practice answer phone message.
• The practice also has an arrangement with BADGER to provide cover between 8am and 9am before the practice opens. During this time BADGER is able to contact the GP if required.
• The practice has a slightly higher proportion of male patients between the ages of 45 and 65 years than the national average. They have a slightly lower than average number of patients who are between 10 and 24 years of age.
• The practice is in an area that is nearer the higher levels of social and economic deprivation.

Updated 22 September 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Mehboob Bhatti’s practice on 31 May 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Staff we spoke with understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. We saw evidence to demonstrate that learning was shared amongst staff.
• 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 skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
• Patients we spoke with told us 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 the waiting area and in the practice leaflet. Although the practice did not have any written complaints, we saw that verbal complaints were being logged.
• Data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) during the year 2014/2015 showed the practice was an outlier for clinical targets in diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) prevalence, asthma reviews and cervical screening. Unverified and unpublished data provided post-inspection by the practice for the year 2015/2016, showed significant improvements in these areas.
• 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 a number of policies and procedures to govern activity, although some were not practice specific.
• 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 had sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Review and update procedures and guidance to ensure they are properly reflective of the requirements of the practice and do not contain outdated or incorrect information.
• Review procedures to ensure effective documentation and organisation of information to enable easier monitoring processes. For example staff meeting records or infection control action plan monitoring.
• Consider how carers could be more proactively identified to ensure all carers were being effectively supported. 

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 22 September 2016

• Performance for diabetes related indicators for the practice was 75% which was below the CCG average of 83% and a national average of 84%. However, exception reporting was lower for the practice at 5% compared with 11% for the CCG and 12% nationally.
• The percentage of patients with hypertension having regular blood pressure tests was 83% which was comparable to the CCG average of 86% and a national average of 84%.
• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.
• For those patients with more complex needs, we identified that the GPs worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 22 September 2016

• Same day appointments were available for children and those with serious medical conditions.
• Immunisation rates for childhood vaccinations were comparable to CCG averages.
• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 68% which was below the CCG average of 78% and the national average of 82%. However, we saw evidence to demonstrate that the most recent uptake rates had improved to a level comparable to local and national averages.
• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives and health visitors. Health visitors held monthly baby clinics at the practice and a midwife held weekly sessions.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• Breast feeding and baby changing facilities were available.

Updated 22 September 2016

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.
• Patients were also able to book telephone consultations with the GP.
• A ‘Friends Together’ group had been set up at the practice for meeting and sharing of information between carers and elderly patients.
• There were longer appointments available for older patients, when necessary and those over 75 were allocated a named GP.
• There were disabled facilities available and the practice had a ramp at the entrance to the building to enable easy access for patients with mobility difficulties.
• Patient consultations were held on the ground floor of the practice.

Updated 22 September 2016

• 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 offered extended hours on Thursdays from 6.30pm to 8pm for working patients who could not attend during normal opening hours.
• Patients were able to book telephone consultations with the GP.
• Patients could book appointments or order repeat prescriptions online.
• The practice offered a full range of health promotion and screening that reflected the needs for this age group. A health trainer attended the practice when required (usually monthly) to support those identified as requiring advice on their diet, smoking cessation and alcohol awareness. Patients were also signposted to more specialist services where appropriate.

Updated 22 September 2016

• Performance for mental health related indicators was 94% which was above the CCG average and national averages of 87%.
• Home visits were available for patients who had clinical needs which resulted in difficulty attending the practice.
• The practice had informed patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.
• The GP we spoke with had good knowledge of the relevant consent and decision-making requirements of legislation and guidance, including the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We saw evidence that staff had completed online mental capacity training.
• Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 22 September 2016

• The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances and alerts were in place on the clinical patient record system.
• The practice worked with health visitors to identify children who may be vulnerable.
• Translation services were available.
• Longer appointments were available for patients with a learning disability.
• Home visits were available for patients who had clinical needs which resulted in difficulty attending the practice.
• Practice policies were accessible to all staff which outlined who to contact for further guidance if they had concerns about a patient’s welfare.
• There was a lead staff member for safeguarding and we saw evidence to show that staff had received the relevant training.
• Staff members we spoke with were able to demonstrate that they understood their responsibilities with regards to safeguarding.