You are here

Dr Mahmud & Partners Good Also known as Church View Surgery and Jones Family Practice

Reports


Inspection carried out on 10 August 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Mahmud & Partners 10 August 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events. Lessons learnt were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice.
  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. However some aspects of GP interactions with patients and access to care and treatment were rated below the local and national averages. Despite the improvements implemented since the last national GP patient survey these improvements had not filtered through in positive patient responses in the latest 2017 national GP patient survey.
  • 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.

  • Six out of eight patients we spoke with said they found it easy to make an appointment with a 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 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.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

A dedicated GP provided pre diabetic care and proactively managed medicine compliance and diabetes reviews regularly through reminder letters, phone calls or text messages. This work had resulted in targeted management of patients with diabetes, for example good control in blood glucose readings of patients with diabetes. This GP also provided training for GPs and nurses to raise the standards of diabetes care and to provide individualised care for patients. The training is called the EDEN project (Effective Diabetes Education Now). The GP had published a paper in a health journal about management of blood glucose in type 2 diabetes and had contributed to a section about when to intensify glucose lowering therapy in the prescribing reference guide (MIMS) for general practice. Their contribution to diabetic care was recognised by the Castle Point and Rochford Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) as a model for use within the wider local health community.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Undertake an annual infection control audit.

  • Continue to identify and support carers.

  • Continue to monitor and ensure improvement in patient satisfaction as highlighted in the areas identified by the national GP patient survey.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 30 September 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Cyrus & Partners on 30 September 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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. Learning from when things went wrong was shared with staff through team meetings which were minuted.
  • There were procedures in place to identify and manage risks to patients and staff.. Risks in relation to premises and fire safety were assessed and action taken to minimise risks. There were no Disclosure and Barring Service checks or risks assessments in place for non-clinical staff who carried out chaperone duties.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. GPs at the practice were proactive in improving outcomes for patients through reviews and clinical audits.

  • Staff were supported and received training appropriate to their roles with further training needs identified through an appraisal system and planned for.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Complaints and concerns made in writing and verbally were responded to and apologies given. Learning from complaints was widely shared with the staff team.
  • Most patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day. The practice regularly reviewed its appointments system taking into account patients views and experiences.
  • 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.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider must

  • Ensure that risks to patients and staff, particularly risks associated with the use of non-clinical staff as chaperones where no Disclosure and Barring check has not been obtained, risks associated with premises and fire safety are identified, monitored and managed to minimise these risks.

The provider should:

  • Implement a clear procedure for the issue of routine, new and repeat prescribing in relation to the role and responsibilities of the prescriptions clerk.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 12 September 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection on 12 September 2013, we found the service to be welcoming with friendly staff. We saw that on arrival at the service staff spoke politely to people and consultations were carried out in private treatment rooms. People we spoke with told us they were happy with the service; we were told they found the reception staff helpful and friendly.

We looked at a number of people’s electronic records. We saw evidence that verbal consent had been obtained before examinations or procedures had occurred. People told us that their treatment was clearly explained to them and they were able to ask questions and make choices about their treatment or medication. This enabled people to make informed decisions regarding their care.

Information was clearly displayed for people, including health promotion, access to support services and information about the practice and the services provided.

During our inspection we saw from the records we looked at that staff had received regular training, supervisions and appraisals. Appropriate pre-employment checks had been carried out.

The people we spoke with were happy with the service and did not have any concerns or issues about the care and treatment they received.