Archived: Community Health Centre

Updated 8 August 2016

Community Health Centre is a GP practice, which provides primary medical services to approximately 10,935 patients living in the Spinneyhill area of Leicester City. All patient facilities are accessible. Leicester City Clinical Commissioning Group (LCCCG) commission the practice’s services.

The practice has three GP partners and four GPs (four male and three female). The nursing team consists of an advanced nurse practitioner, four practice nurses and a healthcare assistant. They are supported by a Practice Manager and a team of reception staff and administrative staff.

Community Health Centre is a training practice and offers training to medical students and doctors.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are available between 8am and 11.30am and 3.30pm and 5.30pm. Extended hours appointments are offered on a Saturday from 9am to 11.30am. In addition to pre-bookable appointments, telephone triage and urgent appointments are also available.

Patients can access  out of hours support from the national advice service NHS 111. The practice also provides details for the nearest walk-in centre at Merlyn Vaz Health Centre, as well as accident and emergency departments.

Updated 8 August 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Community Health Centre on 07 June 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• There was an effective system in place to report and record significant events. They were investigated, discussed at staff meetings and lessons were shared to improve safety in the practice.

• The practice followed clear and comprehensive infection prevention and control procedures. Areas of good practice were shared with other practices in the area.

• Staff assessed needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.

• Clinical audits were completed to review the quality of the service and make improvements.

• Personal development was encouraged for all staff members.

• Patients were supported to live healthier lives and information was provided to ensure they could self-manage their medical conditions safely.

• Patient feedback said staff were polite and respectful. Patients said staff were co-operative and all care and treatment was fully explained.

• Information for patients about the services available was easy to understand and available in the most commonly used languages.

• The practice worked with local community groups to meet the needs of the local population. For example, the Muslim Burial Council of Leicestershire.

• The practice had a clear vision to deliver a comprehensive health care service, empowering patients to manage their own health and using a range of health promotion.

• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour. The partners encouraged a culture of openness and honesty.

• The patient participation group was active and involved in the development of patient education material, including what services were available at the practice and how to use them.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• The patient participation group worked with the practice to develop patient education material. This included producing a mock video of patients telephoning for an appointment with a specific GP and the practice explaining the services provided to alleviate demand pressures on GPs; a video of a mock consultation and the information to be provided at an appointment and a video explaining how to label specimen bottles. The videos had been displayed in waiting areas and the practice had seen an improvement in patient awareness.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 8 August 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.

• 76% of those diagnosed with diabetes had a blood test to assess diabetes control (looking at how blood sugar levels have been averaging over recent weeks) compared to the national average of 78%.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

• All these patients had a named GP and structured annual reviews were planned 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.

• An annual Ramadan seminar was offered to diabetic patients to teach them to safely manage their diabetes for those that wished to fast.

• Advanced care planning was in place for patients with asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Updated 8 August 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.

• Immunisation rates were comparable to local averages for all standard childhood immunisations.

• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 65%, which was lower than the CCG average of 69% and the national average of 74%.

• 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 and health visitors.

• Baby changing facilities and a breast feeding room were available.

• Prenatal, antenatal and postnatal care was provided by midwives and GPs onsite.

Updated 8 August 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 people in its population. Personalised care plans were in place to address medical and social needs.

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

• All patients over the age of 75 have a named GP.

• The practice worked with the Muslim Burial Council of Leicestershire (MBCOL) to provide death certificates for families who wish to have an earlier funeral.

Updated 8 August 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.

• Extended hours were offered at the weekend for those who could not attend during normal working hours.

• The practice was proactive in offering online services to book an appointment and request repeat prescriptions.

• A full range of health promotion and screening was available that reflected the needs for this age group.

Updated 8 August 2016

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

• 98% of those with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder or other had a comprehensive and agreed care plan in place, compared to the national average of 88%.

• 100% of patients with a diagnosis of dementia had their care reviewed in a face-to-face review, compared to the national average of 84%.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those living with dementia.

• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

• Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 8 August 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable.

• The practice signposted patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people and asylum seekers to relevant support when they registered at the practice.

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

• Annual reviews were available 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 and were aware of their responsibilities.