Archived: Dr Makram Mossad

Updated 24 December 2015

Dr Makram Mossad’s practice is located within a dense housing estate, in the Whinmoor area of Leeds. They have a higher than national average of patients who are aged 35 years and under.

Dr Mossad set up the practice in 1992, originally working from a portacabin. He subsequently purchased and extended the premises the practice currently operates from, increasing his patient list size to the current figure of 2022. The consulting and treatment rooms are all on the ground floor. There is disabled access to the premises and a separate room for privacy should patients require it.

It is a single handed GP practice. There is one male GP and a female practice nurse. There is also access to a second female practice nurse. The management and administration team consists of a practice manager and two receptionist/administration staff.

Dr Makram Mossad’s practice is open between 8.30am to 6pm on Monday to Friday. On Wednesday the practice closes at 1pm. Morning appointments are available from 9am to 11am on Monday to Friday and afternoon appointments from 3pm to 5pm Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday.

Out of hours care is provided by Local Care Direct and is accessed via the surgery telephone number or by calling the NHS 111 service.

The practice sits within Leeds South and East Clinical Commissioning Group and provides services under the terms of the locally agreed NHS Personal Medical Services (PMS) contract. They are registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide the following regulated activities; maternity and midwifery services, surgical procedures, diagnostic and screening procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. They also offer a range of enhanced services such as influenza, pneumococcal and childhood immunisations. 

Updated 24 December 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Makram Mossad on 10 November 2015. 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.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment. Urgent appointments were available for the same day as requested. Appointments with the GP of their choice were also available.
• The practice worked closely with other organisations, such as Leeds South and East Clinical Commissioning Group, in planning how services were provided to ensure that they meet people’s needs.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 24 December 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long term conditions.

• All the patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check that their health and medicines needs were being met. The GP and practice nurses had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

• The House of Care model was used with all patients who had diabetes and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (a disease of the lungs). (The House of Care model is a proactive, holistic and patient centred care approach for people with long term conditions.) This approach enabled patients to have a more active part in determining their own care and support needs in partnership with clinicians.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

Updated 24 December 2015

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 accident and emergency (A&E) attendances.

• Patients and staff told us children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals.

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

• Childhood immunisation and cervical screening uptake rates were comparable to other practices in the locality.

• Pre and post-natal care was provided by the GP, in conjunction with the midwifery and health visiting teams.

• All children who required an urgent appointment were seen on the same day as requested

Updated 24 December 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.

• The practice provided proactive, responsive and personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population. Home visits and urgent appointments were available for those patients with enhanced needs.

• The practice worked closely with other health and social care professionals, such as the district nursing team and community matron, to ensure housebound patients received the care they needed.

Updated 24 December 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students).

• The needs of these patients 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 offered earlier morning and late evening appointments as needed.

Updated 24 December 2015

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

• Annual health checks and individualised care plans were offered for these patients and data showed 70% had received one in the last twelve months; which was below the CCG average of 82%. The practice were aware of this and had taken steps to address the issue.

• The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary teams, such as the local mental health team,  in the case management of people in this population group. Patients and/or their carer were given information how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

• Advance care planning was undertaken with  patients who had dementia.

• There was a system in place to follow up those patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have experienced poor mental health.

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

Updated 24 December 2015

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.

• Longer appointments were available for patients as needed.

• The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. Information was provided on how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

• Staff knew how to recognise signs of abuse in children, young people and adults whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. They 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.