• Doctor
  • GP practice

KS Medical Centre Limited Also known as KS Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

33 Dormers Wells Lane, Southall, Middlesex, UB1 3HY (020) 8574 3986

Provided and run by:
KS Medical Centre Ltd

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 1 October 2018

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at KS Medical Centre Limited on 17 July 2017. The overall rating for the practice was good. However, within the key question responsive some areas were identified as ‘requires improvement’, as the practice was had received low responses related to accessibility of appointments in the GP survey July 2017 results.

This inspection was a focused desk based review carried out on 31 August 2018 to confirm the practice had carried out their plan to make improvements. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and any additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice has made improvements relating to access at the practice.

In addition, improvements had been made in the following areas we had recommended;

  • The practice had made improvements with the patient participation group and where working with the CCG to establish a fully functional group.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions.

  • Nursing staff had lead roles in long-term disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

  • Performance for patients with diabetes, on the register, in whom the last blood test was 62 mmol/mol or less in the preceding 12 months, was comparable to the national average (practice 75%; national 78%).

  • The practice followed up on patients with long-term conditions discharged from hospital and ensured that their care plans were updated to reflect any additional needs.

  • There were emergency processes for patients with long-term conditions who experienced a sudden deterioration in health.

  • All these patients had a named GP and there was a system to recall patients for a structured annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For those patients with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of families, children and young people.

  • From the sample of documented examples we reviewed 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.

  • Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.

  • Patients told us, on the day of inspection, that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals.

  • The practice provided support for premature babies and their families following discharge from hospital.

    Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

  • The practice worked with midwives, health visitors and school nurses to support this population group. For example, in the provision of ante-natal, post-natal and child health surveillance clinics.

  • The practice had emergency processes for acutely ill children and young people and for acute pregnancy complications.

Older people

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.

  • Staff were able to recognise the signs of abuse in older patients and knew how to escalate any concerns.

  • The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older patients in its population.

  • The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

  • The practice identified at an early stage older patients who may need palliative care as they were approaching the end of life. It involved older patients in planning and making decisions about their care, including their end of life care.

  • The practice followed up on older patients discharged from hospital and ensured that their care plans were updated to reflect any extra needs.

  • Where older patients had complex needs, the practice shared summary care records with local care services.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of working age people (including those recently retired and students).

  • The needs of these populations 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 Saturday appointments.

  • The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflects the needs for this age group.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia).

  • 76% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which was comparable to the national average. The practice had 47 patients who were eligible for the screening.

  • The practice specifically considered the physical health needs of patients with poor mental health and dementia.

  • The practice had a system for monitoring repeat prescribing for patients receiving medicines for mental health needs.

  • The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those living with dementia.

  • Patients at risk of dementia were identified and offered an assessment.

  • The practice had information available for patients experiencing poor mental health about how they could access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

  • The practice had a system to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.

  • Staff interviewed had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 12 September 2017

The practice is rated as good for the care of people 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.

  • 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 offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.

  • The practice regularly worked with other health care professionals in the case management of vulnerable patients.

  • The practice had information available for vulnerable patients about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

  • Staff interviewed knew how to recognise signs of abuse in children, young people and adults whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. They were aware of their responsibilities regarding information sharing, documentation of safeguarding concerns and how to contact relevant agencies in normal working hours and out of hours.