Archived: Martlesham Heath Surgery

Updated 4 May 2016

Martlesham Heath Surgery provides personal medical services to a population of 5,876 patients in the Ipswich area. The practice is situated six miles to the east of Ipswich. This is an ancient area of heathland and latterly the site of Martlesham Heath Airfield. (made famous by the film ‘Reach for the Sky’ about RAF Squadron Leader Douglas Bader who was stationed there during The Second World War). A new village was established here in the mid 1970’s and this has developed into a modern community based on a traditional village pattern. The practice’s patient population consists of: 20% of patients aged 0 – 17, 54% of patients are aged 18 – 64 years, 23% of patients are aged 65 years and over. The practice is situated within 600 meters of a large BT HQ Research Laboratory and the practice provides medical services to large numbers of short term temporary residents and their families. The practice patient demographics are mainly affluent, white, middle class residents.

The practice provides treatment and consultation rooms on the ground floor with level access. We noted that although the main doors are not automatic, however there is a front door bell and a sign advising patients who are unable to manage the door that assistance is available. Parking is available.

The practice has a team of three GPs. Two GPs (one male and one female) are partners which mean they hold managerial and financial responsibility for the practice. In addition to this, there is one male salaried GP.

There is a team of practice nurses, which includes two nurse practitioners, two nurses and one healthcare assistant who run a variety of appointments for long term conditions, minor illness and family health.

There is a practice manager who is supported by a team of non-clinical administrative, secretarial and reception and dispensary staff who share a range of roles, some of whom are employed on flexible working arrangements. The practice also has a dispensary service which is available from 8.00am until 6.30pm Monday to Friday.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 8.30am to 12am and from 3pm to 6pm Monday to Friday.  Extended surgery hours are offered on Wednesdays from 6.30pm to 9.30pm. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that could be booked up to 12 weeks in advance.  Urgent appointments are also available for patients that need them. Appointment reminders are sent to patients via text message. The practice participates in the Suffolk Federation’s access pilot called ‘GP+’ and make appointments available outside core hours. The practice also uses the 111 service when the practice is closed.  (This is the Out-of-Hours emergency service led by GPs). 

Updated 4 May 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Martlesham Heath on 5 April 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.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
• 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.
• 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.
• 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 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.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• Where vulnerable and frail patients were identified, the practice provided them with a direct telephone number to the practice. Staff received training to ensure this telephone line was responded to within two rings to ensure patients received an appropriate and rapid response to their requests for assistance. This ensured that such patients did not feel isolated.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Ensure patients waiting for their appointments in all areas of the practice can be clearly seen by reception staff to ensure patients whose health might deteriorate can be seen by staff.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 4 May 2016

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.

• 66% of patients with diabetes, on the register, whose blood pressure reading were 140/80mm Hg or less (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015) compared to the national average of 78%.

• 100% of patients with diabetes, on the register had received a flu vaccination the previous year.

• 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 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.

Updated 4 May 2016

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 relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.

• 68.31% of patients with asthma, on the register, had an asthma review in the preceding 12 months (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015) compared to the national average of 75.35%.

• 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.

• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 78.21% which was below the national average of 81.83%.

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

• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 4 May 2016

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.

Updated 4 May 2016

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 reflects the needs for this age group.

• The practice encouraged its patients to attend national screening programmes for bowel and breast cancer screening, with 69.6% of patients aged between 60-69 years of age, screened for bowel cancer in last 30 months and 82% of female patients aged 50-70 years of age, screened for breast cancer in last 36 months. These were above CCG and national averages.

Updated 4 May 2016

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 below the national average of 84%.

• 93% of patients experiencing poor mental health who had had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is above the national average of 84%.

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

• The practice carried out advance care planning for patients with dementia.

• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

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

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

Updated 4 May 2016

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. Of the ten patients on the learning disabilities register, only four had received a health review in the previous 12 months. We weret old the practice were in the process of inviting these patients for an annual review. The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.

• Where vulnerable and frail patients were identified, the practice provided them with a direct telephone number to the practice. Staff received training to ensure this telephone line was responded to within two rings to ensure such patients received an appropriate and rapid response to their requests for assistance. This ensured that such patients did not feel isolated.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people.

• The practice informed vulnerable patients about 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.