Archived: Cherry Medical Practice

Updated 7 October 2016

Cherry Medical Practice is located in Salford. The address of the practice is Little Hulton District Centre, Manchester, Salford, M28 0AY. The practice has limited parking facilities but has good public transport links with bus stops nearby. The practice shares its premises with another registered provider.

The practice is a partnership with one male and two female GPs, a practice nurse (female), a practice manager, and a team of administration staff. The practice uses a regular locum GP.

The practice is open and offered appointments between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 9am to 11.10am in the morning and 3pm to 5.20pm in the evening. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that can be booked up to six weeks in advance, urgent appointments are also available for people that needed them.

Outside of opening hours, patients are directed to the NHS 111 out of hour’s service.

The practice has approximately 2500 patients and operates under a personal medical services (PMS) contract and is part of NHS Salford Clinical Commissioning Group. The age group of the patients at the practice is similar to that of the national average but with a slightly higher than average amount for people ages 20-29.

Updated 7 October 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Cherry Medical Practice on 05 September 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

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.
• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.
• 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. However, there was not a robust method for recording complaints or audit trail.
• 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 but did not have health and safety and fire safety risk assessments in place.
• The practice did not have a clear leadership structure but staff did tell us they felt supported by management.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

• Ensure there is a system in place to document relevant recruitment checks have been carried out prior to a person’s employment.

• Ensure risk assessments have been undertaken in relation to health and safety and fire safety.

• Ensure all staff receive training relevant to their role and that the practice has a formal way to monitor training records for staff.

• Ensure all clinical staff have indemnity insurance.

• Ensure the practice has a system in place to ensure all staff receive patient safety alerts.

• Ensure that patient group directions are signed by an authorised person.

The area where the provider should make improvement is:

• Consider implementing a more formal way to document complaints and that there is a clear audit trail for these.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 7 October 2016

The practice is rated as requires improvement for the care of people with long-term conditions. This is because the provider was rated as requires improvement overall. The concerns which led to those ratings apply to everyone using the practice, including this population group. However, there were examples of good practice.

• 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 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 7 October 2016

The practice is rated as requires improvement for the care of families, children and young people. This is because the provider was rated as requires improvement overall. The concerns which led to those ratings apply to everyone using the practice, including this population group. However, there were examples of good practice.

• 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.
• 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 and health visitors.

Updated 7 October 2016

The practice is rated as requires improvement for the care of older people. This is because the provider was rated as requires improvement overall. The concerns which led to those ratings apply to everyone using the practice, including this population group. However, there were examples of good practice.

• The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of this population group.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 7 October 2016

The practice is rated as requires improvement for the care of working age people (including those recently retired and students). This is because the provider was rated as requires improvement overall. The concerns which led to those ratings apply to everyone using the practice, including this population group. However, there were examples of good practice.

• 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.

Updated 7 October 2016

The practice is rated as requires improvement for the care of People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). This is because the provider was rated as requires improvement overall. The concerns which led to those ratings apply to everyone using the practice, including this population group. However, there were examples of good practice.

• 80% of patients diagnosed with dementia that had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average of 84%.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients 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 on patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.
• Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 7 October 2016

The practice is rated as requires improvement for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. This is because the provider was rated as requires improvement overall. The concerns which led to those ratings apply to everyone using the practice, including this population group. However, there were examples of good practice.

• The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people and those with a learning disability.
• 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 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.