Archived: Dr Marilyn Hunt

Updated 4 February 2016

Dr Marilyn Hunt surgery was established in 1997 and has approximately 2314 patients. The clinical team consists of Dr Marilyn Hunt, a female GP and a male GP locum. The GP works full time at the practice and the locum GP works Monday to Thursday afternoons and Friday mornings and as required. They are supported by two female practice nurses who work three sessions (or 15.5hours a week) and are overseen by the full time practice manager.

The practice is situated on a new housing estate near Brentwood Town and occupies a single storey purpose built health facility. The practice has two consultation rooms, treatment room and waiting facilities. They have patient car park and step free access.

The practice is open and appointments are available all day between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday, with extended opening on a Wednesday evening till 7.30pm.

The practice does not provide out of hours care and patients are advised to call the NHS 111 service that operates locally from Brentwood Community Hospital.

The surgery does not have a website.

Updated 4 February 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Marilyn Hunt, also referred to as Highwood Surgery on 6 January 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 identified, assessed and well managed. For example undertaking infection prevention control audits and legionella assessments.
• 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 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.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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.
• The practice had clear objectives to deliver high quality care. These were shared and demonstrated by all members of staff in their interactions with patients and one another.
• 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 improvement are:

• Ensure discussions and decisions are consistently recorded and reviewed to ensure where remedial actions are taken these are evidenced appropriate.
• Ensure access to cleaning records.

Professor Steve Field

CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 4 February 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, diabetes and asthma and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.
• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.
• All these patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check that their health and medicines needs were being met. For those people with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 4 February 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 were looked after by the local authority or had a high number of A&E attendances.
• Immunisation rates were 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.
• The practice cervical screening rates were similar to the national average.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• The practice work with partner health and social care services and see patients for postnatal checks, including conducting screening for post natal depression.
• The practice worked in partnership with health specialists such as the Emotional Wellbeing and Mental Health Services for children (EWMHS).

Updated 4 February 2016

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

• The practice offered proactive, personalised care in partnership with other health and social care professionals to meet the needs of the older people in its population
• It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.
• The practice participated in the admission avoidance programme, providing care plans for patients at risk of emergency admission to hospital.

Updated 4 February 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. The practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible, flexible and offered continuity of care by providing an evening clinic once a week.
• The practice conducted opportunistic health screenings for patient’s 40-65years of age and had a wealth of health literature available to patients within the practice.

Updated 4 February 2016

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

• Performance for mental health related indicators was better than the national averages. For example patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses had a comprehensive agreed care plan documented in the record, in the preceding 12 months.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people 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.
• It had a system in place to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.
• The practice benefits from the attendance of a counsellor who attends the practice weekly to provide therapeutic interventions and advise.

Updated 4 February 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.
• It offered longer appointments for people with a learning disability.
• The practice had patients with sight and hearing impairments and used their preferred method of communicating e.g. text relay or writing.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people.
• It had told 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.
• Weekly prescriptions are issued where patients may misuse medications.