Archived: Peeler House Surgery

Updated 9 April 2018

Peeler House Surgery occupies a converted building in Ferriby Road, Hessle, East Riding of Yorkshire HU13 0RG. The practice has a General Medical Services (GMS) contract. There are 2453 patients on the practice list and the majority of patients are of white British background. The proportion of the practice population in the under 18 years age group is comparable to the local CCG and England average. The proportion of the practice population in the 65 years and over age group is below the local CCG average and comparable to the England average. The practice scored six on the deprivation measurement scale, the deprivation scale goes from one to ten, with one being the most deprived. People living in more deprived areas tend to have a greater need for health services.

The practice has one male GP and one female GP. There is one practice nurse and one phlebotomist. There is a practice manager, assistant practice manager/secretary and three receptionist/ admin staff.

The practice is open between 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 8.30am to 10.30am every morning and 3.30pm to 6pm daily. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that could be made in advance, urgent appointments are also available for people that need them.

When the practice is closed, patients are directed to NHS 111. The Out Of Hours service is provided at a GP Emergency Centre. Information for patients requiring urgent medical attention out of hours is available in the waiting area, in the practice information leaflet and on the practice website.

Updated 9 April 2018

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Peeler House Surgery on 19 January 2017. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report on the January 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Peeler House Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was a desk-based review carried out on 9 March 2018 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 19 January 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

Recruitment procedures were in place and all necessary pre-employment checks had been carried out for newly recruited staff.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 14 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.
• 92% of patients on the diabetes register had a record of a foot examination and risk classification within the preceding 12 months. This was similar to the CCG average of 90% and the national average of 89%.
• 82% of patients with asthma, on the register, had an asthma review in the preceding 12 months that included an assessment of asthma control using the 3 RCP questions. This was better than the CCG average of 76% and the national average of 75%.
• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.
• All these patients had a named GP and an annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met.

Updated 14 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. Childhood immunisation rates for the vaccinations given were comparable to CCG/national averages.

• Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals.
• Uptake for the cervical screening programme was 87% which was better than the CCG average of 80% and the national average of 76%.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

Updated 14 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.

Updated 14 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.
• The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion that reflects the needs for this age group.

Updated 14 March 2017

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

• 100% of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which was better than the CCG average of 77% and the national average of 78%.
• 100% of patients with psychoses have had a comprehensive, agreed care plan which was better than the CCG and national averages of 88%
• We found no evidence the practice worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.
• We found no evidence 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 may have been experiencing poor mental health.
• Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 14 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 offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.
• 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.