Archived: Maple Practice

Updated 10 January 2017

Maple Practice is located in a residential area on the outskirts of the urban town centre of Dartford, Kent and provides primary medical services to approximately 3,800 patients. The practice is based on the ground floor of a purpose built building which it shares with two other GP practices. Other health related services are provided on the first floor of the building. There are limited parking facilities but some road side parking is available at a short walk from the practice. The building is accessible for patients with mobility issues and those with babies/young children.

The practice patient population mostly compares to the England average in terms of age distribution, however, there are slightly more female children from the age of 0 to 19 and slightly less older people from the age of 64 to 84. It is in an area where the population is considered to be less deprived. There are some people registered as patints who do not have English as their first language.

There are two GP partners at the practice one male and one female. There is one female practice nurse and a female phlebotomist. The GPs and nurse are supported by a practice management team and reception/administration staff.

The practice is open from Monday to Friday between 8am and 6.30pm. Extended hours appointments are available every Monday evening until 7pm and every Wednesday evening until 8pm. In addition, appointments can be booked up to eight weeks in advance, and urgent on the day appointments are available for people that need them. Appointments’ can be booked over the telephone, online, by fax or in person at the practice. There are arrangements with other providers (Integrated Care 24) to deliver services to patients outside of the practice’s working hours.

The practice runs a number of services for its patients including; family planning; minor surgery; chlamydia screening; immunisations and travel vaccines and advice.

Services are provided from: Maple Practice, Dartford West Health Centre, Tower Road, Dartford, Kent, DA1 2HA.

Updated 10 January 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Maple Practice on 19 October 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 for reporting and recording significant events and learning from these was discussed and shared at practice meetings.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, including infection prevention and control, however, some fabric chairs in the shared waiting area were stained and there was no process in place to ensure they were appropriately cleaned.
• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• 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 responsibility for the care of patients at a care home with nursing and visited on a weekly basis.
• Data from the national GP patient survey rated the practice higher than the clinical commissioning group (CCG) and the national average for telephone access.
• The practice had good facilities and made good use of all available space 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.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Review the cleaning schedule to help ensure regular deep cleaning or the replacement of the fabric chairs in the shared waiting area is carried out.
• Continue to develop a patient participation group.
• Continue to identify and support patients who are also carers.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 10 January 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.
• Both GP partners had completed training in diabetes during the last year and a diabetes specialist nurse had been recruited.
• The percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, in whom the last IFCC-HbA1c was 64 mmol/mol or less in the preceding 12 months (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015), was 63% which was lower than the CCG average of 77% and the national average of 78%.
• The percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, in whom the last blood pressure reading (measured in the preceding 12 months) was 140/80 mmHg or less (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015) was 75% which was comparable to the CCG average of 76% and the national average of 78%.
• The percentage of patients on the diabetes register, with a record of a foot examination and risk classification within the preceding 12 months (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015) was 91% which was higher that the CCG average of 87% and the national average of 88%.
• 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 10 January 2017

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

• 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 (A&E) attendances.
• Immunisation rates were high for all standard childhood immunisations.
• Staff members told us that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals.
• The percentage of women aged 25-64 whose notes record that a cervical screening test had been performed in the preceding 5 years (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015) was 80% which was lower than the CCG average of 87% and comparable to the national average at 82%.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

Updated 10 January 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 patient population, for example, end of life care and dementia care management.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.
• Older people had a dedicated GP for continuity of care; however, they were also able to see any GP of their choice.
• Eight weekly multi-disciplinary meetings were held to discuss the care and treatment needs of patients, including end of life care.
• The practice had responsibility for the care of patients at a nursing home and visited on a weekly basis.

Updated 10 January 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 patient population, those recently retired and students had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to help 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.
• Extended hours appointments were offered weekly on a Monday and Wednesday evening.

Updated 10 January 2017

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

• 84% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which was comparable to the CCG average of 82% and the national average of 84%.
• The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses whose alcohol consumption had been recorded in the preceding 12 months (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015) was 94% which was higher than the CCG and national average of 90%.
• 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 advanced 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 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 10 January 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 people living 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.