Abington Park Surgery

Updated 10 March 2016

Abington Park surgery provides general medical services to a population of approximately 12,400 patients in Northampton town centre and surrounding areas under a personal medical services (PMS) contract. A PMS contract is a locally agreed alternative to the standard General Medical Services (GMS) contract used when services are agreed locally with a practice which may include additional services beyond the standard contract. The practice operates from a well-equipped, two storey premises, with disabled access and the building is shared by another GP practice. Consultations take place with the nursing staff on the ground floor and GP consultation rooms are on the first floor and can be accessed via a lift or stairs.

The practice population had a higher than average number of patients aged 25 to 45 years and over 85 years as well as a higher than average number of patients in the 0 to 4 year age group. National data indicates that the area does not have high levels of deprivation.

The practice has seven partners, six of whom are GPs and the other partner is the practice manager as well as the registered manager. They employ three nurse practitioners, three practice nurses and a health care assistant and have a team of administrative and reception staff who support the practice. It is a training practice which supports registrars who are qualified doctors training to be GPs. They also train medical students who are training to be doctors.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday, Tuesday and Friday, and offer extended hours on Wednesdays from 7am until 6.30pm, Thursdays 8am until 8pm and Saturdays from 7.30am until 11am.  When the surgery is closed services are provided by Integrated Care 24 Limited and patients can contact the service via NHS 111.

Updated 10 March 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Abington Park Surgery on 20 January 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 and could access 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 10 March 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. The practice proactively sought patients to prevent exacerbations and complications of long term conditions.
• 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.
• Patients with multiple conditions were offered an holistic review to include all conditions and prevent additional visits.

Updated 10 March 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 high for all standard childhood immunisations.
• 75% of patients diagnosed with asthma, on the register had had an asthma review in the last 12 months which was the same as the national average.
• 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.
• Cervical screening results were the same as the national average of 81%.
• 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.

Updated 10 March 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.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 10 March 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 10 March 2016

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

• 79% percent of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average of 84%.
• 100% of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses had a comprehensive, agreed care plan in place.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people 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 10 March 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.
• 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 people.
• 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.