Archived: Vicarage Road Surgery

Updated 9 January 2017

Vicarage Road Surgery is a purpose built premises located in the King’s Heath area of Birmingham, within the Birmingham South and Central Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG). The practice is served by the local bus network and there is accessible parking available. The practice and facilities are fully accessible to wheelchair users.

The practice provides primary medical services to approximately 2,300 patients in the local community. The practice population is approximately 70% White British, with the majority of the remaining 30% being Asian or Asian British. There are small numbers of patients from African Caribbean and Chinese backgrounds.

The clinical staff team consists of one female and one male GP partners and one advanced nurse practitioner. The practice is currently recruiting to one nurse and one health care assistant posts.

The clinical team is supported by an office manager, a business manager, a data quality lead, a medical secretary and a team of four reception staff.

A new practice manager is due to start in November 2016. Until then the practice management functions are carried out by the GP partners and the business manager, with support from the rest of the staff team when needed.

The practice building and telephone lines are open from 8.30am to 12.30pm and from 3.30pm to 6.30pm on Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays; until 7.30pm on Tuesdays; and in the morning only (8.30am to 12.30pm) on Wednesdays. Appointments are also available at these times. The practice is not open at weekends.

When the practice is closed (including from 8am to 8.30am on weekdays) out of hours services are provided by Primecare. Further out of hours services are provided by the NHS 111 non-emergency facility.

Updated 9 January 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Vicarage Road Surgery on 3 November 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 for reporting and recording significant events.

• Risks to patients were appropriately assessed and well managed.

• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. All staff had received training and updates which provided them with the skills, current 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.

• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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 9 January 2017

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

• Practice staff had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

• Performance for diabetes-related indicators was in line with the CCG and national averages. For example, 95% of patients with diabetes on the register received the influenza immunisation in the last 12 months compared with CCG and national averages of 94%.

• The practice recognised the higher than average prevalence of diabetes locally and provided prevention and early intervention services, including signposting to local support services.

• 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 9 January 2017

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

• There were systems 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 (A&E) attendances.

• Immunisation rates were slightly lower than regional averages for all standard childhood immunisations, but there were low numbers of children eligible. The practice was aware of these figures and had proactively encouraged families to attend to increase immunisation rates.

• Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age-appropriate way and were recognised as individuals. We saw evidence to confirm this.

• The practice provided same day appointments for those aged five and under.

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

• The practice provided combined parent and baby clinics carrying out post-natal and early child development checks.

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

Updated 9 January 2017

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.

• All patients aged 75 and above and those considered frail or with complex needs were allocated a named GP.

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

• The practice considered the needs of older patients when offering appointments, for example considering off-peak public transport times.

• The practice directed older people to appropriate support services.

Updated 9 January 2017

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 reflected the needs for this age group. Patients could book appointments and request repeat prescriptions online.

• The practice offered text message reminders for patient appointments.

• Appointments were offered to accommodate those unable to attend during normal working hours.

Updated 9 January 2017

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

• Performance for mental health related indicators was in line with the CCG and national averages. For example the percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses whose alcohol consumption had been recorded in the last 12 months was 91% compared with CCG and national averages of 91% and 90% respectively.

• 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, for example the Birmingham Healthy Minds service.

• The practice had a system to follow up patients who had attended emergency A&E 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 9 January 2017

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.

• The practice’s computer system alerted GPs if a patient was also a carer. The practice had identified 34 patients as carers, which represented 1.5% of the total practice population.

• 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. 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.