Updated 21 May 2018

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection was in January 2015– the practice was rated as Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Port View Surgery on 17 April 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

• The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
• Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
• Results of the July 2017 national GP patient survey showed the practice had performed better than CCG and national averages for example, 100% of patients who responded said they had confidence and trust in the last GP they saw; CCG - 97%; national average - 95%.
• Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it. Patients were offered 15 minute appointments.
• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
• The practice actively encouraged and supported their Patient Participation Group to promote local Health initiatives, for example support for carers.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018

We rated the practice and all of the population groups as good for providing effective services overall

(Please note: Any Quality Outcomes (QOF) data relates to 2016/17. QOF is a system intended to improve the quality of general practice and reward good practice.)

Effective needs assessment, care and treatment

The practice had systems to keep clinicians up to date with current evidence-based practice. We saw that clinicians assessed/did not assess needs and delivered care and treatment in line with current legislation, standards and guidance supported by clear clinical pathways and protocols.

• Patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. This included their clinical needs and their mental and physical wellbeing.
• We saw no evidence of discrimination when making care and treatment decisions.
• Equipment such as the automated Blood Pressure, 24hr Blood pressure and 24hr electrocardiogram (ECG) machines were available to save patients time in accessing these services elsewhere or having to travel to a different site.
• Staff used appropriate tools to assess the level of pain in patients.
• Staff advised patients what to do if their condition got worse and where to seek further help and support.

Older people:

• Older patients who are frail or may be vulnerable received a full assessment of their physical, mental and social needs. The practice used an appropriate tool to identify patients aged 65 and over who were living with moderate or severe frailty. Those identified as being frail had a clinical review including a review of medication.
• Patients aged over 75 were invited for a health check. If necessary they were referred to other services such as voluntary services and supported by an appropriate care plan.
• The practice followed up on older patients discharged from hospital. It ensured that their care plans and prescriptions were updated to reflect any extra or changed needs.
• Staff had appropriate knowledge of treating older people including their psychological, mental and communication needs.
• Local care homes had a named GP for continuity of care and GPs carried out weekly ward rounds to review patients.

People with long-term conditions:

• Patients with long-term conditions had a structured annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For patients with the most complex needs, the GP worked with other health and care professionals to deliver a coordinated package of care.
• Staff who were responsible for reviews of patients with long term conditions had received specific training.
• The practice had arrangements for adults with newly diagnosed cardiovascular disease including the offer of high‑intensity statins for secondary prevention, people with suspected hypertension were offered ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and patients with atrial fibrillation were assessed for stroke risk and treated as appropriate.
• The practice was able to demonstrate how they identified patients with commonly undiagnosed conditions, for example diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), atrial fibrillation and hypertension)
• The percentage of patients with asthma, on the register, who have had an asthma review in the preceding 12 months that includes an assessment of asthma control using the three RCGP (Royal College of GPs) questions was 63% which was lower the CCG and national average. The practice had recognised this and had made improvements. The percentage of patients up to the end of March 2018 receiving a review was 70% showing an improvement.

Families, children and young people:

• Childhood immunisations were carried out in line with the national childhood vaccination programme. Uptake rates for the vaccines given were in line with the target percentage of 90% or above.
• The practice had arrangements to identify and review the treatment of newly pregnant women on long-term medicines. These patients were provided with advice and post-natal support in accordance with best practice guidance.
• The practice had arrangements for following up failed attendance of children’s appointments following an appointment in secondary care or for immunisation.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students):

• The practice’s uptake for cervical screening was 79%, which was in line with the 80% coverage target for the national screening programme.
• The practices’ uptake for breast and bowel cancer screening was in line the national average.

• Patients had access to appropriate health assessments and checks including NHS checks for patients aged 40-74. There was appropriate follow-up on the outcome of health assessments and checks where abnormalities or risk factors were identified.

People whose circumstances make them vulnerable:

• 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 held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people, travellers and those with a learning disability.
• The practice had a system for vaccinating patients with an underlying medical condition according to the recommended schedule.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia):

• The practice assessed and monitored the physical health of people with mental illness, severe mental illness, and personality disorder by providing access to health checks, interventions for physical activity, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, cancer and access to ‘stop smoking’ services. There was a system for following up patients who failed to attend for administration of long term medication.
• When patients were assessed to be at risk of suicide or self-harm the practice had arrangements in place to help them to remain safe.
• 85.5% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the previous 12 months. This was higher than the national average of 84%.
• 92% of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in the previous 12 months. This was above the national average of 90%.
• The practice specifically considered the physical health needs of patients with poor mental health and those living with dementia. For example 92% of patients experiencing poor mental health had received discussion and advice about alcohol consumption. This was comparable to the national average of 91%.
• Patients at risk of dementia were identified and offered an assessment to detect possible signs of dementia. When dementia was suspected there was an appropriate referral for diagnosis.
• The practice offered annual health checks to patients with a learning disability.

Monitoring care and treatment

The practice had a comprehensive programme of quality improvement activity and routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided. Where appropriate, clinicians took part in local and national improvement initiatives.

• The practice used information about care and treatment to make improvements.
• The practice was actively involved in quality improvement activity. Where appropriate, clinicians took part in local and national improvement initiatives.

Effective staffing

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.

• Staff had appropriate knowledge for their role, for example, to carry out reviews for people with long term conditions, older people and people requiring contraceptive reviews.
• Staff whose role included immunisation and taking samples for the cervical screening programme had received specific training and could demonstrate how they stayed up to date.
• The practice understood the learning needs of staff and provided protected time and training to meet them. Up to date records of skills, qualifications and training were maintained. Staff were encouraged and given opportunities to develop.
• The practice provided staff with ongoing support. This included an induction process, one-to-one meetings, appraisals, clinical supervision and support for revalidation.
• There was a clear approach for supporting and managing staff when their performance was poor or variable.

Coordinating care and treatment

Staff worked together and with other health and social care professionals to deliver effective care and treatment.

• We saw records that showed that all appropriate staff, including those in different teams and organisations, were involved in assessing, planning and delivering care and treatment.
• The practice shared clear and accurate information with relevant professionals when deciding care delivery for people with long term conditions and when coordinating healthcare for care home residents. The shared information with, and liaised, with community services, social services and carers for housebound patients and with health visitors and community services for children who have relocated into the local area.
• Patients received coordinated and person-centred care. This included when they moved between services, when they were referred, or after they were discharged from hospital. The practice worked with patients to develop personal care plans that were shared with relevant agencies.
• The practice ensured that end of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of different patients, including those who may be vulnerable because of their circumstances.

Helping patients to live healthier lives

Staff were consistent and proactive in helping patients to live healthier lives.

• The practice identified patients who may be in need of extra support and directed them to relevant services. This included patients in the last 12 months of their lives, patients at risk of developing a long-term condition and carers.
• Staff encouraged and supported patients to be involved in monitoring and managing their own health, for example through social prescribing schemes.
• Staff discussed changes to care or treatment with patients and their carers as necessary.
• The practice supported national priorities and initiatives to improve the population’s health, for example, stop smoking campaigns, tackling obesity.

Consent to care and treatment

The practice obtained consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance.

• Clinicians understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making.
• Clinicians supported patients to make decisions. Where appropriate, they assessed and recorded a patient’s mental capacity to make a decision.
• The practice monitored the process for seeking consent appropriately.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Updated 21 May 2018

We rated the practice, and all of the population groups, as good for providing responsive services

Responding to and meeting people’s needs

The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. It took account of patient needs and preferences.

• The practice understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to those needs.
• Telephone GP consultations were available which supported patients who were unable to attend the practice during normal working hours.
• The facilities and premises were appropriate for the services delivered.
• The practice made reasonable adjustments when patients found it hard to access services.
• The practice provided effective care coordination for patients who are more vulnerable or who have complex needs. They supported them to access services both within and outside the practice.
• Care and treatment for patients with multiple long-term conditions and patients approaching the end of life was coordinated with other services.

Older people:

• All patients had a named GP who supported them in whatever setting they lived, whether it was at home or in a care home or supported living scheme.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs. The GP also accommodated home visits for those who had difficulties getting to the practice due to limited local public transport availability.

People with long-term conditions:

• Patients with a long-term condition received an annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being appropriately met. Multiple conditions were reviewed at one appointment, and consultation times were flexible to meet each patient’s specific needs.
• The practice held regular meetings with the local district nursing team to discuss and manage the needs of patients with complex medical issues.

Families, children and young people:

• 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. Records we looked at confirmed this.
• All parents or guardians calling with concerns about a child under the age of 18 were offered a same day appointment when necessary.

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 on line services.

People whose circumstances make them vulnerable:

• The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people, travellers and those with a learning disability.
• People in vulnerable circumstances were easily able to register with the practice, including those with no fixed abode

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia):

• Staff interviewed had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and those patients living with dementia.
• Patients who failed to attend were proactively followed up by a phone call from a GP.

Timely access to care and treatment

Patients were able to access care and treatment from the practice within an acceptable timescale for their needs.

• Patients had timely access to initial assessment, test results, diagnosis and treatment.
• Waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and managed appropriately.
• Patients with the most urgent needs had their care and treatment prioritised.
• Patients reported that the appointment system was easy to use.

Listening and learning from concerns and complaints

The practice took complaints and concerns seriously and responded to them appropriately to improve the quality of care.

• Information about how to make a complaint or raise concerns was available. Staff treated patients who made complaints compassionately.
• The complaint policy and procedures were in line with recognised guidance. The practice learned lessons from individual concerns and complaints and also from analysis of trends. It acted as a result to improve the quality of care.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information.

Updated 21 May 2018

We rated the practice and all of the population groups as good for providing a well-led service.

Leadership capacity and capability

Leaders had the capacity and skills to deliver high-quality, sustainable care.

• Leaders were knowledgeable about issues and priorities relating to the quality and future of services. They understood the challenges and were addressing them.
• Leaders at all levels were visible and approachable. They worked closely with staff and others to make sure they prioritised compassionate and inclusive leadership.
• The practice had effective processes to develop leadership capacity and skills, including planning for the future leadership of the practice.

Vision and strategy

The practice had a clear vision and credible strategy to deliver high quality, sustainable care.

• There was a clear vision and set of values. The practice had a realistic strategy and supporting business plans to achieve priorities. The practice developed its vision, values and strategy jointly with patients, staff and external partners.
• Staff were aware of and understood the vision, values and strategy and their role in achieving them.
• The strategy was in line with health and social priorities across the region. The practice planned its services to meet the needs of the practice population.
• The practice monitored progress against delivery of the strategy.

Culture

The practice had a culture of high-quality sustainable care.

• Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued. They were proud to work in the practice.
• The practice focused on the needs of patients. For example, the practice advertised and encouraged parents to use a Handi paediatric App that gives advice about childhood illnesses and when to seek help
• Leaders and managers acted on behaviour and performance inconsistent with the vision and values.
• Openness, honesty and transparency were demonstrated when responding to incidents and complaints. The provider was aware of and had systems to ensure compliance with the requirements of the duty of candour.

• Staff we spoke with told us they were able to raise concerns and were encouraged to do so. They had confidence that these would be addressed.
• There were processes for providing all staff with the development they need. This included appraisal and career development conversations. All staff received regular annual appraisals in the last year. Staff were supported to meet the requirements of professional revalidation where necessary.
• Clinical staff were considered valued members of the practice team. They were given protected time for professional development and evaluation of their clinical work.
• There was a strong emphasis on the safety and well-being of all staff.
• The practice actively promoted equality and diversity. Staff had received equality and diversity training. Staff felt they were treated equally.
• There were positive relationships between staff and teams.

Governance arrangements

There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.

• Structures, processes and systems to support good governance and management were clearly set out, understood and effective. The governance and management of partnerships, joint working arrangements and shared services promoted interactive and co-ordinated person-centred care.
• Staff were clear on their roles and accountabilities including in respect of safeguarding and infection prevention and control
• Practice leaders had established proper policies, procedures and activities to ensure safety and assured themselves that they were operating as intended.

Managing risks, issues and performance

There were clear and effective processes for managing risks, issues and performance.

• There was an effective, process to identify, understand, monitor and address current and future risks including risks to patient safety.
• The practice had processes to manage current and future performance. Performance of employed clinical staff could be demonstrated through audit of their consultations, prescribing and referral decisions. Practice leaders had oversight of national and local safety alerts, incidents, and complaints.
• Clinical audit had a positive impact on quality of care and outcomes for patients. There was clear evidence of action to change practice to improve quality.
• The practice had plans in place and had trained staff for major incidents.
• The practice implemented service developments and where efficiency changes were made this was with input from clinicians to understand their impact on the quality of care.

Appropriate and accurate information

The practice acted on appropriate and accurate information.

• Quality and operational information was used to ensure and improve performance. Performance information was combined with the views of patients. For example, the practice had reduced the cost of their prescribing of medicines and had effectively reduced their spend to have the lowest prescribing costs per 1,000 patients in East Cornwall.
• Quality and sustainability were discussed in relevant meetings where all staff had sufficient access to information.
• The practice used performance information which was reported and monitored and management and staff were held to account.
• The information used to monitor performance and the delivery of quality care was accurate and useful. There were plans to address any identified weaknesses.
• The practice used information technology systems to monitor and improve the quality of care.
• The practice submitted data or notifications to external organisations as required.
• There were robust arrangements in line with data security standards for the availability, integrity and confidentiality of patient identifiable data, records and data management systems.

Engagement with patients, the public, staff and external partners

The practice involved patients, the public, staff and external partners to support high-quality sustainable services.

• A full and diverse range of patients’, staff and external partners’ views and concerns were encouraged, heard and acted on to shape services and culture. There was an active patient participation group. The PPG had ran an information event for anyone affected by Dementia within the community. This event led to the creation of Dementia Voice PL12 support group. They also worked with the town council to help make Saltash a dementia friendly area.
• The service was transparent, collaborative and open with stakeholders about performance.

Continuous improvement and innovation

There were evidence of systems and processes for learning, continuous improvement and innovation.

• There was a focus on continuous learning and improvement. For example, following a diagnosis of child with cancer, the GPs completed a GP training tool on a website. The link for this training was then circulated to all GPs in Kernow.
• Staff knew about improvement methods and had the skills to use them.
• The practice made use of internal and external reviews of incidents and complaints. Learning was shared and used to make improvements.
• Leaders and managers encouraged staff to take time out to review individual and team objectives, processes and performance.

Please refer to the Evidence Tables for further information...

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018

Updated 21 May 2018