Dr A.Q. Sheikh & Partners Also known as Queens Road Medical Centre

Updated 6 December 2016

Dr A Q Sheikh and Partners is located in a converted house within a residential area of East London. The practice is a part of Waltham Forest Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).

There are 6982 patients registered with the practice with 7% of which were aged over 75 years compared to the national average of 17%.

The practice has two male GP Partners and one female GP partner completing 16 sessions per week, one male salaried GP carrying out nine sessions per week, three sessional female GP’s carrying out 14 sessions per week and a GP registrar completing eight sessions per week. There are two sessional nurses and one senior clinical nurse specialist completing seven sessions per week and a health care assistant completing six sessions per week. The practice has a practice manager, a support manager and a team of reception/administration staff members. The practice is a designated training practice.

The practice operates under a Personal Medical Services Contract (PMS) (a locally agreed alternative to the standard GMS contract used when services are agreed locally with a practice which may include additional services beyond the standard contract).

The practice is open Monday to Friday between 8:45am and 6:30pm; phone lines are open from 8:45am. Appointment times are as follows:

• Monday 9:00am to 11:30am and 4:30pm to 8:00pm

• Tuesday 9:00am to 11:30am and 4:30pm to 6:30pm

• Wednesday 9:00am to 11:30am and 1:00pm to 2:30pm doors closed at 3:15pm

• Thursday 9:00am to 1:00pm doors closed

• Friday 9:00am to 11:30am and 4:30pm to 6:30pm

The out of hours provider covers calls made to the practice whilst it is closed.

Dr A Q Sheikh and partners operates regulated activities from one location and is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide surgical procedures, midwifery and maternity services, diagnostic and screening procedures, and treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

Updated 6 December 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr A Q Sheikh on 5 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 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 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.
• The practice carried out talks during Ramadan at local mosques to advise patients and the public about the risks of fasting and having diabetes.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Monitor and put in place systems to address low patient satisfaction scores.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 6 December 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.

• 83% of patients on the diabetes register had a record of a foot examination and risk classification within the preceding 12 months, which is comparable to the national average of 88%.

• Patients received a telephone consultation reminding them of their appointments.

• 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 6 December 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 76%, which is comparable to 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, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 6 December 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.

• Annual health checks were offered to patients aged over 75.

Updated 6 December 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.

• The practice offered extended hours on a Monday evening and the practice carried out daily telephone consultations.

• The practice was signed up to the local HUB that offered GP appointments on weekends.

Updated 6 December 2016

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

• 86% of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average of 84%.

• The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive agreed care plan documented in the record was 90% compared with the national 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 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 6 December 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 and 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.