Archived: New Milton Health Centre

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at New Milton Health Centre on 5 January 2017. 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 assessed and well managed.
• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with 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. Patient feedback was consistently positive.
• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day. The practice made use of electronic ways of accessing advice and treatment. Patients that worked commented on how useful they found this service.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• 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 practice used care registers to identify those patients in need of additional support and assistance. For example, 97% of the 59 patients diagnosed with a learning disability had received an annual health check in the last 12 months.

• There was an innovative approach to delivery of care and the practice piloted new services. For example, it had led in the development of single patient record with other health providers in the locality.

• There was a focus on the needs of each population group registered and recognition of the higher than average elderly population. For example, one GP specialised in care of the frail elderly.

• The practice demonstrated a commitment to health promotion and prevention of poor health. Nationally reported data showed effective performance in delivering smoking cessation advice and in monitoring blood pressure to prevent further health problems developing.

• The practice was proactive in identifying patients with caring responsibilities and delivering advice and support to this group.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• Governance and performance was kept under regular review by use of a 36 point key performance indicator programme. Services were adjusted when the need for further improvement was identified, such as appointments could be added at times of peak demand. The KPI’s had enabled the practice to match resources to demand by closely monitoring practice performance.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Ensure that blank prescription stationery tracking identifies which prescriber or clinical room prescriptions have been issued to.

• Ensure all responses to complaints detail the route to escalate a complaint if the patient feels it necessary to do so.

• Ensure a review of exception reporting for patients diagnosed with diabetes is undertaken.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice