Archived: Brockway Medical Centre

Updated 4 June 2015

The Backwell and Nailsea Medical Group operate two GP practices in the Brockway Medical Centre and Backwell Medical Centre. One of the GP partners is registered as manager with the Care Quality Commission for both practices.

The group is a partnership of seven GPs and there are four associate GPs equating to two full time equivalent GPs. The partnership employs a manager to oversee the running of Brockway Medical Centre and Backwell Medical Centre. Nurses and administrative staff, including receptionists work in both medical centres and whilst the GPs generally work in one of them they do sometimes work in both.

The Brockway Medical Centre is situated behind the main High Street at 8 Brockway, Nailsea, Bristol, BS48 1BZ.

The practice is a teaching practice and hosts fully qualified GP Registrars gaining experience in general practice.

The Backwell and Nailsea Medical Group has around 13,500 patients. Patients registered with the Backwell and Nailsea Medical Group can have appointments in either of the medical centres which offers choice and increases access to appointments.

There were12 consulting and treatment rooms in the practice including a dedicated room for minor operations.

The practice contracts it’s Out Of Hours service with Brisdoc.

Updated 4 June 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Backwell and Nailsea Medical Group at Brockway Medical Practice on 10 February 20165. We also carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the Backwell and Nailsea Medical Group at Backwell Medical Centre.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for older patients, those with long term conditions, mothers babies and young patients, those of working age including, the recently retired and students. It was also good for providing services to patients with poor mental health and those whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.

Our key findings were as follows:

• Risk assessments were conducted for all areas of the practice. Staff received training in risk assessment and had compiled a health and safety manual and policy document.
• Staff knew who the lead GP was for safeguarding and demonstrated an understanding of their role and responsibilities in relation to the protection of children and vulnerable adults.
• There were clinics for chronic disease management including asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic heart disease, diabetes and smoking cessation.
• The practice had a dedicated ‘dressings nurse’ who supported the residents of a nearby nursing home and had provided continuity and improved outcomes for patients.
• External services operated in the medical centre for continence management, midwifery and urology, along with mental health, osteopathy, physiotherapy, podiatry and diet management.
• Patient feedback on the comment cards we received was positive.
• The reception manager told us no one was refused to be seen for urgent same day appointments.
• There was a clear leadership structure with named members of staff in lead roles.
• Audits were conducted as part of research projects and in response to guidelines issued by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE).

We saw an area of outstanding practice:

• The PPG compiled a leaflet for patients entitled ‘How to get the best out of your doctor’s appointment’.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 4 June 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 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.

The practice structure enabled all long term conditions covered by the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) to have a named lead GP. There were clinics for chronic disease management including asthma, diabetes and smoking cessation.

Updated 4 June 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.

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. 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 and health visitors.

The registered manager told us the practice had recently commenced a research study to look at the impact of disfiguring conditions (e.g. severe acne, birthmarks or scarring) on young people and the success of psychological interventions.

Updated 4 June 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of 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.

The practice was engaged in the unplanned admissions enhanced service contract and had individual care plans for vulnerable older patients. Each of these patients had a ‘flag’ on the electronic recording system to enable them to be identified easily.

The practice had a dedicated ‘dressings nurse’ who supported the residents of a nearby nursing home. The registered manager told us this had led to improved outcomes due to continuity.

Updated 4 June 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 reflected the needs for this age group.

If patients between the age of 16 years and 75 years had not seen a GP in the last three years they were encouraged to make an appointment to see their GP.

Updated 4 June 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary 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 a register of patients with diagnosed severe mental illness who were offered an annual health review by their ‘usual GP’.

Updated 4 June 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 reflected the needs for this age group.

If patients between the age of 16 years and 75 years had not seen a GP in the last three years they were encouraged to make an appointment to see their GP.