Dr Bhupendra Modi

Updated 26 May 2016

Dr Bhupendra Modi is a GP practice providing primary medical services to around 3,019 patients within a residential area in Leicester City. There is a high diversity within the patient population. Leicester City Clinical Commissioning Group (LCCCG) commission the practice’s services.

The service is provided by a male GP. The practice is a training practice, and therefore can also offer appointments with another qualified doctor. There is a nursing team comprising of a part-time practice nurse and a part-time healthcare assistant. A practice manager and a team of reception and administration staff support them.

The practice is located within a converted two-storey semi-detached house. Most patient facilities are situated on the ground floor, however the treatment room is based on the first floor.

The practice is open from 8am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday and offers extended hours on a Monday between 6.30pm and 7.30pm. Clinics are from 8.30am to 11.30am and 4pm to 6pm.

Telephone triage is carried out by the GP from 8.30 am to 9.20am. Patients can access out of hours support from the national advice service NHS 111. The practice also provides details for the nearest walk-in centres to treat minor illnesses and injuries, as well as accident and emergency departments.

Updated 26 May 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced desk based follow up inspection on 25 April 2016 to follow up concerns we found at Dr Bhupendra Modi on 24 February 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed. The practice had carried out a detailed risk assessment regarding legionella and put into place relevant monitoring systems.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 21 April 2016

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

• The GP led chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

• Performance for diabetes related indicators, for example monitoring of blood sugar levels, was better compared to the national average. 85% compared to 78%.

• The practice offered longer appointments and home visits to those that needed it.

• A structured annual review was carried out to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For those patients with the most complex needs, the GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care, including domiciliary services.

Updated 21 April 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 for the standard childhood immunisations were comparable to the CCG averages.

• 91% of patients diagnosed with asthma had an asthma review in the last 12 months. This was slightly higher than the national average of 75%.

• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 72%, which was comparable to the CCG average of 69% and the national average of 74%.

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

• The practice offered contraception services, including the insertion and removal of contraceptive implants.

Updated 21 April 2016

The provider 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 on the day appointments.

• Those at high risk of hospital admission and end of life care needs were identified and reviewed regularly, this included working with other health professionals to provide co-ordinated care.

• Those identified as high risk had a care plan in place.

Updated 21 April 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 offered online services to book appointments and order repeat prescriptions.

• Health promotion advice was offered during consultations and a range of accessible health promotion material was available in the patient waiting area.

• Telephone consultations were also available on a daily basis.

Updated 21 April 2016

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

• 100% of patients with a diagnosis of dementia had their care reviewed in a face-to-face review, compared to 84% nationally.

• 100% of those with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder or other had a comprehensive and agreed care plan in place, compared to 88% nationally.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those living with dementia. This included working closely with the mental health facilitator.

• The practice carried out advance care planning for patients with dementia and offered dementia screening services.

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

• 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.

• Longer appointments were available for patients who needed additional support from the GP.

Updated 21 April 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.

• An annual review was carried out by the practice nurse for patients living with a learning disability.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people and ensured regular reviews and care plans were in place.

• 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 and knew how to contact relevant agencies in normal working hours and out of hours.

• All staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.