• Doctor
  • GP practice

Yorkshire Street Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

80 Yorkshire Street, Burnley, Lancashire, BB11 3BT (01282) 731361

Provided and run by:
Yorkshire Street Medical Centre

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Yorkshire Street Medical Centre is a GP practice and delivers service to 7,290 patients under a contract held with NHS England.

The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice area is 86.4% white, 10.7% Asian, 1.2 other non-white ethnic groups, 1.7% mixed.

Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the second decile (2 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

SAFE: Yorkshire Street Medical Centre had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Management investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.

EFFECTIVE: People using Yorkshire Street Medical Centre were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people and took decisions in people’s best interests where they did not have capacity.

CARING: People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

RESPONSIVE: People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

WELL-LED: Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.
 

9 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Yorkshire Street Medical Practice on 9 February 2016. 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.
  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses.

  • There were systems in place to assess and monitor risks to patients, though we noted there was no paediatric mask in place for emergency oxygen, some supplies were out of date and blind pulls had not been assessed to remove potential ligature points.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • The practice used innovative and proactive methods to improve patient outcomes, working with other local providers to share best practice. For example, the practice had encouraged patients to attend exercise on prescription over many years.

  • Feedback from patients about their care was consistently and strongly positive.

  • The practice worked closely with other organisations and with the local community in planning how services were provided to ensure that they met people’s needs.

  • The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a consequence of feedback from patients and from the patient participation group (PPG). For example, hand rails had been put up after a patient comment and a new ramp had been installed following feedback from the PPG.
  • The practice had a clear vision with patient care as the top priority.
  • The practice actively engaged with patient groups who may historically have been difficult to reach, for example parents of new born babies and 16 year olds.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Access to appointments was well managed. Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment and there was good continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day and routine pre bookable appointments always available within 48 hours.
  • 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 areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Complete actions to mitigate the risks identified including supplies and emergency equipment, blind pulls, alarm calls and prescription pads.

  • Develop infection prevention and control procedures to incorporate relevant blood spill guidance and sample handling.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice