Archived: The Village Medical Centre

Updated 18 February 2016

The Village Medical Centre provides a range of primary medical services to the residents of the Great Denham area. The practice population is approximately 6400 and is made up of primarily white British patients covering all ages with a high than average number of patients between the ages of 30 to 50. National data indicates that the area does not have significant levels of deprivation. Services are provided under a General Medical Services Contract.

There is a lead GP and lead business manager who are supported by five additional GPs, one male and four female, a nurse practitioner, two practice nurses and a health care assistant (HCA). The practice employs a large patient support team, including secretaries and an apprentice who are supported by a patient support manager and an IT manager. The practice is a training practice and currently supports three trainee GPs. A GP trainee is a qualified doctor who is training to become a GP through a period of working and training in a practice. Only approved training practices can employ GP trainees and the practice must have at least one approved GP trainer.

The practice is open from 8am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 8.30am to 11.45am and 2pm to 6pm Monday to Friday. Telephone appointments are also available. The practice has run a trial of extended hours and Saturday opening following patient feedback and discussions with the patient participation group (PPG) but following the trial it was found not to be cost effective or well utilised, therefore had ceased.

Patients requiring a GP outside normal working hours are advised to contact NHS 111 who will connect them to Bedford Doctor On Call (BEDOC) if appropriate.

Updated 18 February 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Village Medical Centre on 3 November 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with urgent appointments available the same day.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

• The practice had clean and good facilities, which were well equipped to treat patients.

• 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.

• 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.

• There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.

• 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.

• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

• 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.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 18 February 2016

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. We saw evidence that the practice reviewed all patient deaths to check the circumstances and how the family were coping in order to learn from this to aid patients in the future.

Updated 18 February 2016

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. All children identified as ‘in need’ were discussed at practice meetings. Immunisation rates were above the average 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, and we saw evidence to confirm this. We saw good examples of joint working with midwives and health visitors.

Updated 18 February 2016

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. It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs. The practice added all patients over the age of 75 to an unplanned admissions group, and care plans were developed and patients invited into the practice for a review.

Updated 18 February 2016

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.  Patients were able to email the GPs with queries. The practice offered online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflected the needs of this age group.

Updated 18 February 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people within this group. 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. It had a system in place to carry out an annual review undertaken by a lead GP as a home visit. Staff had received training on how to care for people with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 18 February 2016

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. It had carried out annual health checks and offered longer appointments for people with a learning disability.

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