Clift Surgery Partners

Updated 8 November 2016

The Clift Surgery, Minchens Lane, Bramley, Basingstoke RG26 5BH is located in a rural area. The practice covers three moderate sized villages having both a rural and commuter population.

The Clift Surgery has a general medical services (GMS) contract to provide services to approximately 6,500 patients living in the surrounding area. The practice provides an in house dispensary serving 90% of patients registered at the practice and can provide acute and repeat prescriptions.

The practice reception is open Monday to Friday 8.30am to 6pm although telephone calls are taken until 6.30pm. The dispensary is open Monday to Friday 8.30am to 1.00pm and 2pm to 6pm. Routine surgeries are held Monday to Friday from 9am to 12pm, 2pm to 4pm and 3.30pm

to 5.30pm. The practice also offer extended hours, for pre-booked appointments only, as follows: On the first Saturday of the month from 9am to 12pm and every Tuesday from 7am to 8am. Alternate Wednesdays 7am to 8am alternate Thursdays 6.30pm to 8pm. The practice has opted out of providing out-of-hours services to their own patients and refers them to Hantsdoc who are the out-of-hours provider. Patients can access Hantsdoc via the NHS 111 service.

The practice has three GP partners and a salaried GP who together provide an equivalent of three and a half full time staff. In total there are one male and two female partner GPs. The practice also employs one salaried female GP. The GPs are supported by two nursing staff and two health care assistants. The practice also has an administration team which consists of receptionists, administrators, secretary, reception manager, IT manager and the practice manager.

Updated 8 November 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced inspection at Clift Surgery Partners on 24 August 2016 to monitor whether the practice had made improvements related to medicines management, identified at our inspection in February 2015.

At our last inspection in February 2015, areas which did not meet the regulations were:

• Prescriptions were not reviewed to ensure they were signed by a GP before they were given to a patient.

• Fridge temperatures were recorded but we were unable to see historical records.

• Keys for controlled drugs and prescription forms were accessible by all staff entering the dispensary.

• Prescription serial numbers were not recorded when they were given to GPs to use.

• Standard operating procedures (SOP) for dealing with medicines were in place but some of the SOPs, especially for controlled drugs (CDs) were not complete as they needed to reflect the procedures at the practice.

At this inspection in August 2016, we found that the provider had taken action to meet the requirement. Key findings were as follows:

• The practice had a suitable system in place for reviewing prescriptions prior to being given to patients.

• Complete records of fridge temperatures were available for inspection.

• Keys for controlled drugs and prescription forms were kept securely and only accessible to authorised members of staff.

• Records were maintained of prescription serial numbers when they were given to GPs.

• Standard operating procedures had been reviewed and reflected procedures at the practice.

The Care Quality Commission is satisfied that the regulations are now met. However, there are two areas where the practice should consider making further improvements:

• The practice should make sure that maximum and minimum temperatures are recorded for all medicine fridges and that actions are noted when the temperature is outside of the recommended range.

• The practice’s stock management system for blank prescription stationery should include what has been received, along with serial number data.

The full report published on 9 July 2015 should be read in conjunction with this report. The rating for the safe domain is now good and the overall rating remains good.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 9 July 2015

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

Patients in this population group received safe, effective care which was based on national guidance. Care was tailored to patient needs, there was a multi-disciplinary input and was reviewed regularly.

The practice provided regular clinics for patients with diabetes, respiratory and cardiac conditions. The practice had two nurses who had received training and provided diabetic care and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease care in their own clinics.

Updated 9 July 2015

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

The practice followed national protocols and staff were aware of their responsibilities and the various legal requirements in the delivery of care to people in this population group. They worked with other health and social care providers to provide safe care.

Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations. Patients told us, and we saw evidence, that children and young people were treated in an age appropriate way and recognised as individuals. The practiced was working with midwives and health visitors to provide shared continuity of care and communication. The practice endeavoured to register family groups with the same named GP.

The practice had specific protected appointments for children after school.

Updated 9 July 2015

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

Nationally reported data showed the practice had good outcomes for conditions commonly found amongst 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. The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, including offering home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 9 July 2015

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

There was an appropriate system of receiving and responding to concerns and feedback from patients in this group who had found difficulty in getting appointments. The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening which reflected the needs for this age group.

Updated 9 July 2015

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

The practice had a shared care approach to dementia in the nursing homes and community and actively identified patients with possible dementia and referred through the dementia pathway.

The practice ensured that good quality care was provided for patients experiencing poor mental health. The practice offered proactive, personalised care that met the needs of the older people in its population and had a range of enhanced services, for example in dementia.

Updated 9 July 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.

There was evidence of good multidisciplinary working with involvement of other health and social care workers. Staff were trained on safeguarding vulnerable adults and child protection.

The practice had regular meetings with the Integrated Care team involving the community matron (who had a virtual ward list of patients vulnerable to admission), district nurses, social worker and a Community Psychiatric nurse. The aim was to discuss vulnerable patients in the community either through health, social or psychiatric issues, and try to formulate a combined plan of action.