Wickersley Medical Practice

Updated 18 October 2018

Dr Clarke and Partners, or Wickersley Health Centre as it is known locally, is located in the Wickersley area of Rotherham. The practice is part of the Rotherham Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and responsible for providing services for 7,043 patients under the personal medical services (PMS) contract.

The practice catchment area is situated in one of the least deprived areas in England. The age profile of the practice population is similar to other GP practices in the Rotherham CCG area.

The practice has one female GP partner who works six sessions per week, two male GP partners who work eight and six sessions per week and one male salaried GP who works five sessions per week. They are supported by three practice nurses, a healthcare assistant, an apprentice health care assistant and a phlebotomist. The administration team consists of five receptionists, four medical secretaries, apprentice receptionist/administration assistant, one practice manager and an assistant practice manager.

A health trainer and a mental health practitioner hold clinics at the practice once a week to support patients.

The practice is open from 8am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday.

The out of hours service can be accessed via the practice telephone number or by contacting NHS 111.

Updated 18 October 2018

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating January 2018 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Not inspected

Are services effective? – Not inspected

Are services caring? – Not inspected

Are services responsive? – Not inspected

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Dr Clarke and partners on 13 September 2018. The inspection was carried out to follow up on breaches of regulations and to review that the practice had addressed the areas for improvement found in our previous inspection in January 2018. This report covers our findings in relation to those areas.

At this inspection we found:

• The practice had made improvements in systems and processes to manage risk and had assured themselves health and safety checks had been completed.
• They had implemented improved recruitment policies and procedures.
• They had acted to improve patient experience when making an appointment.
• Appraisal records had been completed.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence tables for further information.

Updated 20 August 2015

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. 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 medication 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 20 August 2015

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 accident and emergency attendances. Immunisation rates were relatively 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. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. We saw good examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses

Updated 20 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients were good for conditions commonly found in older people. The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population and had a range of enhanced services, for example, in dementia and end of life care. It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 20 August 2015

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 August 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including   people with      people with dementia). Of those experiencing poor mental health 93% had received an annual physical health check. The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia. It carried out advance care planning for patients 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.

Updated 20 August 2015

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 circumstances which make them vulnerable including those with a learning disability.

The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary 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.