Archived: Park Lane Medical Centre Also known as Greywell Medical Centre

Updated 12 May 2016

Park Lane Medical Centre is situated in one of the most deprived areas of South Eastern Hampshire. The practice has approximately 5500 patients on its register. There are an equal number of male and female patients. The majority of patients are white British. There are higher numbers of children under ten years of age when compared with the national average.

The practice has two GP partners, both male, two salaried GP's, one male and one female and one regular female locum GP. There are two practice nurses, a practice manager and deputy practice manager and eight administrators/receptionists.

The practice was open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments were from 9am until 12pm and 2pm until 5.30pm daily. Extended appointment hours were offered on the second and third Saturday of the month between 9am and 1pm, GP and practice nurse appointments were available during this time. The practice also offered telephone consultations and urgent on the day appointments for those that needed them. Out of hours patients were advised to contact NHS 111.

We inspected the only location at:

82 Park Lane

Havant

PO9 3HN

Updated 12 May 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park Lane Medical Centre on 16 February 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 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.
• 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 requirements of the Duty of Candour.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 12 May 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. Systems were in place to recall patients for their health reviews.

• Indicators for diabetes were comparable to or better than the national averages. For example, there were 95% of patients on the practice register with a record of foot examination compared with the national average of 89%.

• 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 12 May 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 accident and emergency attendances. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.

• A total of 78% of patients with asthma on the register had had an asthma review, compared with the national average of 75%.

• 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.

• The practice’s uptake for cervical screening was 80% compared which was comparable to the national average of 82%.

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

• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

• Families were registered with the same GP.

Updated 12 May 2016

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 patients in its population.

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older patients, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs. When needed, joint home visits from a practice nurse and a GP were carried out.

• The practice talked daily with the community team about patients who were receiving support.

• Each GP had a personal list of older people, which promoted continuity of care.

Updated 12 May 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.

• 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 May 2016

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

• A total of 90% of patients diagnosed with dementia had had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is above the comparable to the national average.

• Indicators for treatment of patients with a diagnosed mental condition showed that the practice was comparable to the national averages. For example, 90% of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive agreed plan, compared with the national average of 88%.

• 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 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.

• The practice had a system in place 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 12 May 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 and those with a learning disability.

• The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams 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.