Archived: Park House Surgery

Updated 12 November 2015

Park House surgery is a purpose built GP premises in Lanchester. They have a Personal Medical Services (PMS) contract and also offer enhanced services for example; extended hours. The practice is a training and teaching practice and is involved in training medical students, student nurses and General Practitioners. The practice covers the village of Lanchester and has a small number of patients in South Consett and some rural surrounding areas. There are 3902 patients on the practice list and the majority of patients are of white British background. There is a council run traveller’s site in the village and 1-2% of the practice population are from the travelling community.

The practice is a partnership with two partners. There are two salaried GPs. There are two Nurse Practitioners, two Practice Nurses, and two Health Care assistants. There is a Practice Manager and reception and administration staff.

The practice is open between 8am and 6pm Mondays to Fridays and has extended hours from 9am until 12.30pm on Saturdays

Patients requiring a GP outside of normal working hours are advised to contact the GP out of hour’s service provided by North Durham CCG.

Updated 12 November 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park House Surgery on 8 September 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment although not always with their choice of GP. There were urgent and routine appointments available the same day for GPs and Nurses.
• 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.
• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.

The practice worked closely with other organisations and with the local community in planning how services were provided to ensure that they met people’s needs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 12 November 2015

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. Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed. All these patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check that their health and medication needs were being met. For those people with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care. Patients were seen in multidisciplinary clinics with a podiatrist, nurse and dietitian. Data shows above average results for patients with diabetes.

Updated 12 November 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 A&E attendances. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations. Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals. We saw good examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses. Appointments for children were always available as needed.

Updated 12 November 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients were good for conditions commonly found in older people. The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population and had a range of enhanced services, for example, in dementia and end of life care. They were responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 12 November 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students). The needs of this group had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services they 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 12 November 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). 87.5% of people with dementia had received an annual physical health check. The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia. It 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. They had a system in place to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency (A&E) where they may have been experiencing poor mental health. Staff had received training on how to care for people with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 12 November 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. They had carried out annual health checks for people with a learning disability.

The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including a practice population of one to two per cent of patients who were from the travelling community. We were told that this group of patients were always seen if they attended the practice and this was confirmed in feedback from patients. Staff had received training with regard to travellers specific needs.

The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. 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.