Woodstock Surgery

Updated 12 October 2016

Dr Turner and Partners (Woodstock Surgery) is located in Woodstock, Oxfordshire. The practice resides in purpose built premises and there is no parking available. However, the GPs had developed a business plan and been awarded funds to move to a larger premises to meet patient need.

The practice has approximately 9000 registered patients. The practice has a high proportion of patients aged 65 years and above. The area in which the practice is located is placed in the least deprived decile. In general, people living in more deprived areas tend to have a greater need for health services. According to the Office for National Statistics, Oxfordshire has a high proportion of people from a White British background.

There are five GP partners, consisting of three male GPs and two female GPs. GPs provide approximately 36 sessions per week in total. The practice employs two female practice nurses and two health care assistants. The practice manager is supported by a team of administrative and reception staff. The practice provides training to medical students.

The practice is open between 8.30am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 9am to 11.45am and 4.30pm to 6.30pm daily. Extended hours appointments are offered between 6.45am and 8.30am on Wednesdays, from 6.30pm to 7pm on Mondays and Wednesdays, and on Saturdays between 8am and 10.30am. When the practice is closed patients can access the Out of Hours Service via NHS 111 service

Services are provided via a General Medical Services (GMS) contract (GMS contracts are negotiated locally between GP representatives and the local office of NHS England).

Services are provided from the following location:

Woodstock Surgery

Park Lane

Woodstock

Oxford

OX20 1UB

Updated 12 October 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Turner and Partners on 14 September 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 been trained to provide them with 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients could make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• The practice was equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• The practice had a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority. The strategy to deliver this vision was regularly reviewed and discussed with staff.
• The practice had strong and visible clinical and managerial leadership and governance arrangements.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Ensure that staff acting as chaperones receive sufficiently regular training updates to maintain their knowledge of chaperoning responsibilities.
• Implement a failsafe system for ensuring that all medicines are disposed of when they reach their expiry dates.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 12 October 2016

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

• GPs and nursing 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 similar to the national average. For example, the percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, who had influenza immunisation in the preceding 1 August to 31 March was 94% compared to the CCG average of 96% and national average of 94%.
• 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 October 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 relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.
• 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 the cervical screening programme was 92%, which was higher than the CCG average of 83% and 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 schools.
• The practice had been proactive about auditing and improving chlamydia screening rates.

Updated 12 October 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.
• All patients over the age of 75 had a named GP.
• There was a named GP at the practice for a local residential home. The GP visited the residents every week as part of the Care Home Surgery Agreement Scheme. Audit showed that as a consequence fewer emergency hospital admissions occurred and patients died in their preferred place more often.
• The practice was part of a telemedicine pilot with a vascular surgeon to improve the care and experience of patients with leg ulcers. There was a dedicated leg ulcer clinic which had in the past run on bank holidays so that patients did not have to attend hospital.

Updated 12 October 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 October 2016

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

• 96% of patients at the practice diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is higher than the CCG average of 85% and national average of 84%.
• The practice held a dementia pilot carried out by a GP and health care assistant. The practice invited patients to attend for memory assessment to improve dementia detection rates.
• Performance for mental health related indicators was better than the national average. For example, the percentage of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in the record, in the preceding 12 months was 97% compared to the CCG average of 89% and England 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 when appropriate.
• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access counselling and psychological therapy services, 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 October 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 those with a learning disability.
• The practice offered longer appointments 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. 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.