Archived: Town Hall Surgery

Updated 24 March 2017

Town Hall Surgery provides primary medical services in Duckinfield, Tameside from Monday to Friday. The surgery is open Monday to Friday 8:30am – 6:00pm, closed Thursday afternoon.

Appointments with a GP are available daily as part of an open surgery between 8:30am and 10:00am. Patients are given an approximate time for their appointment to enable them to leave and return. On the day and pre bookable appointments are also available between 2:30pm and 5:50pm. The practice are also part of a local extended hours scheme in which patients can access appointments with a GP evenings and weekend locally.

Duckinfield is situated within the geographical area of Tameside and Glossop Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).

The practice has a General Medical Services (GMS) contract. The GMS contract is the contract between general practices and NHS England for delivering primary care services to local communities.

Town Hall Surgery is responsible for providing care to 3225 patients.

The practice consists of three GPs (two partners and one long term locum), one of whom is female, a part time nurses and part time health care assistants. The practice is supported by a practice manager, assistant managers, receptionists and administrators.

When the practice is closed patients are directed to the out of hours service.

Updated 24 March 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the practice of Town Hall Surgery on 21 February 2017. Overall the practice is now rated as good.

The practice had been previously inspected on 17 February 2016. Following that inspection the practice was rated as requires improvement with the following domain ratings:

Safe – inadequate

Effective – Requires improvement

Caring – Good

Responsive – Good

Well led – Requires improvement.

The practice provided us with an action plan detailing how they were going to make the required improvements.

The inspection on 21 February 2017 was to confirm the required actions had been completed and award a new rating if appropriate.

Following this re-inspection on 21 February 2017, our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, including those relating to recruitment checks.

• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.

• Data showed patient outcomes were comparable when compared to those locally and nationally.
• Feedback from patients about their care was strongly positive,

• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

• The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a result of feedback from patients.

• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.

• 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 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.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 24 March 2017

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.
• Where appropriate, patients with more than one long-term condition were able to access a joint review to prevent them having to make multiple appointments.
• All these patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check that their health and medicines needs were being met. For patients with complex needs, a named GP and practice nurse worked with relevant community and healthcare professionals to deliver multidisciplinary support and care. Multidisciplinary meetings were held to review patients’ needs and to avoid hospital admissions.
• Patients with COPD and asthma had self-management plans and those with chronic conditions were provided with care plans.
• Patients who were diagnosed with a long term conditions such as diabetes were directed to a structured education programme.

Updated 24 March 2017

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 and who were at risk, for example, children and young people who had a high number of A&E attendances. Immunisation rates were average 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 and we saw evidence to confirm this.
• 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.

Updated 24 March 2017

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.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.
• The practice embraced the Gold Standards Framework for end of life care which included supporting patients’ choice to receive end of life care at home.

Updated 24 March 2017

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.

• Open surgeries were weekday mornings. On the day and pre bookable appointments were also available between 2:30pm and 5:50pm. The practice was part of a local extended hours scheme in which patients can access appointments with a GP evenings and weekend. 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.

Updated 24 March 2017

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

• 77% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months.
• 85% of patients with poor mental health had a comprehensive care plan documented in the record agreed between individuals, their family and/or carers as appropriate.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.
• It carried out advance care planning for patients with dementia.
• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.
• Staff had a good understanding of how to support people with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 24 March 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 those with a learning disability.
• The practice was aware of those patients who required an interpreter and alerts were placed within patients’ notes to enable staff to pre book interpreters and arrange longer appointments.
• The practice was proactive in monitoring those patients identified as vulnerable or at risk. This included, monitoring A&E attendances, monitoring missed appointments from those known to be vulnerable and working with other services to ensure, where appropriate, information was shared to keep patients safe.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people.
• The practice had told vulnerable patients how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.
• Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse in vulnerable adults and children. Staff 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.