You are here

Dr Poolo's Surgery - Rush Green Medical Centre Good

We are carrying out a review of quality at Dr Poolo's Surgery - Rush Green Medical Centre. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 December 2020

We carried out an GP focused inspection at Dr Poolo's Surgery - Rush Green Medical Centre on the 23 September 2020 and 13 October 2020 as part of our inspection programme.

This report was created as part of a pilot which looked at new and innovative ways of fulfilling CQC’s regulatory obligations and responding to risk in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. This was conducted with the consent of the provider. Unless the report says otherwise, all information contained within this report was obtained remotely from the provider.

We previously inspected Dr Poolo's Surgery on 6 March 2017. At this time we rated the practice good in all key questions. Details of this report can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Poolo's Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

The focused inspection undertaken on 23 September and 13 October 2020 did not review the ratings for the key questions or for the practice overall as this was a focused inspection undertaken to assess whether the provider had taken action to address an area of serious risk highlighted to the Commission following the receipt of information from a coroner's report.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

At this focused inspection we found:

  • Clinical records were viewed not always completed in-depth, which meant the best treatment for patients was identified.
  • Medication reviews were not always undertaken in a timely manner.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Effective

Good

Caring

Good

Responsive

Good

Well-led

Good
Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 16 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long term conditions There was evidence of effective and responsive care to patients with long term conditions (LTCs). Clinical staff had the knowledge and skills to respond to the needs of patients with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes mellitus, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Patients with long term conditions requiring repeat prescriptions were being seen, and reviews of their medications were undertaken regularly. 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.

There was a palliative care (end of life) register and patients on the register were discussed at the monthly meetings. Patients with suspected cancers were referred and seen within two weeks. Longer appointments were also available for people who needed them.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 16 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for care of families, children and young people. The practice was responsive to the needs of the group. There were suitable safeguarding policies and procedures in place, and staff we spoke with were aware of how to report any concerns they had. GPs were appropriately using the required codes on their electronic case management system to ensure risks to children and young people who were looked after or on child protection plans were clearly flagged and reviewed. Records demonstrated good liaison with partner agencies such as the police and social services. The practice offered a full range of immunisations for children, which included travel vaccines and flu vaccinations in line with current national guidance. Last year’s practice performance for all immunisations was above the Clinical Commissioning Group average and there was a clear policy for following up non-attenders by the named practice nurse. Appointments were made available outside of school hours for children and young people.

Older people

Good

Updated 16 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Older people were cared for with dignity and respect. The practice was responsive to their needs, and there was evidence of working with other health and social care providers to provide safe care. We found that older patients identified as at risk of isolation were discussed at monthly multi-disciplinary meetings to monitor their care and address the support they required as necessary. Home visits were also made to older patients. There was evidence of learning and sharing of information to help improve care delivery. There were structured and meaningful discussions in meetings to resolve issues in a time-bound and effective manner.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 16 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students). The practice offered extended opening hours for appointments on Tuesdays from 18.30 pm to 20.00 pm and offered late afternoon appointments between 16.30 pm and 18.30 pm every week day except Thursday to working age people. Patients could book appointments or order repeat prescriptions online.

The practice was performing well in undertaking cervical smear examinations and performance for cervical smear uptake was better than others in the CCG area. There was a policy to offer telephone reminders for patients who did not attend for cervical smears. The uptake for health and blood pressure checks for working age patients was high and the practice offered NHS Health Checks to all patients aged 40-75.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 16 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). The practice provided a caring and responsive service to people experiencing poor mental health.

Of those patients diagnosed with dementia 83.33% had received an annual review of their health. There were 22 patients on the mental health register and 66% of these patients had a comprehensive care plan document. The practice worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health. The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access counselling services. Clinical staff had received training on how to care for people with mental health needs.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 16 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. Patients attending the practice were protected from the risk of abuse because reasonable steps had been taken to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. The practice had policies in place relating to the safeguarding of vulnerable adults and whistleblowing and staff we spoke with were aware of their responsibilities in identifying and reporting concerns.

Patients with a learning disability were supported to make decisions through the use of care plans, which they were involved in agreeing. These care plans were reviewed annually or more frequently if changes in clinical circumstances dictated it and had a section stating the patient’s preferences for treatment and decisions. The practice had numerous ways of identifying patients who needed additional support, and it was pro-active in offering additional help. For example, the practice kept a register of all patients with a learning disability and they were all offered an annual physical health check. The practice registered all patients who were homeless.