Archived: Dr Chidambaram Balachander

Updated 28 January 2016

Dr Chidambaram Balachander (also know as Borstal Village Surgery) is situated in Rochester, Kent and has a registered patient population of approximately 3,465.

The practice staff consists of one GP (male), one practice manager, two practice nurses (both female), one healthcare assistant (female) as well as administration and reception staff. The practice also directly employs one regular locum GP and two salaried GPs. There is a reception and a waiting area on the ground floor. All patient areas are accessible to patients with mobility issues as well as parents with children and babies.

The practice is a training practice (training practices have GP trainees and Foundation Year Two junior doctors).

The practice has a personal medical services (PMS) contract with NHS England for delivering primary care services to local communities.

Primary medical services are provided Monday to Friday between the hours of 8.30am to 12.30pm and 3pm to 6pm. Extended hours surgeries are offered Wednesday 6pm to 7.30pm. Primary medical services are available to patients registered at Borstal Village Surgery via an appointments system. There are a range of clinics for all age groups as well as the availability of specialist nursing treatment and support. There are arrangements with other providers (Medway On Call Care) to deliver services to patients outside of the practice’s working hours.

Services are provided from Borstal Village Surgery, 25 Wouldham Road, Borstal, Kent, ME1 3JY, only.

Updated 28 January 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Chidambaram Balachander (also known as Borstal Village Surgery) on 13 October 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 a system for reporting and recording significant events.

• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered 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 Duty of Candour.

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

The provider should:

• Revise medicines management to include inventories of all vaccines held as well as regular reviews of their stock levels and expiry dates.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 28 January 2016

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

• Service provision for patients with long-term conditions included dedicated clinics with a recall system that alerted patients as to when they were due to re-attend.
• The practice employed staff trained in the care of patients with long-term conditions.
• The practice supported patients to manage their own long-term conditions.
• Specific health promotion literature was available.

Updated 28 January 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of families, children and young people.

• Services for mothers, babies, children and young people at Borstal Village Surgery included access to midwives and health visitor care.
• Specific health promotion literature was available.
• There were systems 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 attendances.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

Updated 28 January 2016

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

• Patients over the age of 75 had been allocated a designated GP to oversee their individual care and treatment requirements.
• Patients were able to receive care and treatment in their own home from practice staff as well as district nurses and palliative care staff.
• There were plans to help avoid older patients being admitted to hospital unnecessarily.
• Specific health promotion literature was available as well as details of other services for older people.
• The practice held regular multidisciplinary staff meetings that included staff who specialised in the care of older people.

Updated 28 January 2016

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

• The practice provided a variety of ways this patient population group could access primary medical services.
• There were appointments available outside of normal working hours.
• Appointments and repeat prescriptions could be accessed on-line.
• Specific health promotion literature was available.

Updated 28 January 2016

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

• This patient population group had access to psychiatrist and community psychiatric nurse services as well as local counselling services.
• Specific health promotion literature was available.
• The practice had a system that followed up patients who had attended accident and emergency where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.

Updated 28 January 2016

The practice is rated as good for the acre of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.

• The practice offered primary medical service provision for patients whose circumstance may make them vulnerable in a variety of ways.
• Patients not registered at the practice could access services.
• Interpreter services were available for patients whose first language was not English.
• Patients with learning disabilities were offered annual physical health checks and medicine reviews.
• Specific health promotion literature was available.
• Specific screening services were available.