Brant Road & Springcliffe Surgery

Updated 2 June 2016

Brant Road Surgery is a surgery in a residential area on the south side of the City of Lincoln. The practice is located in a purpose built building which also houses a dental practice and a pharmacy. Brant Road Surgery is one of the practices within NHS Lincolnshire West Clinical Commissioning Group and provides general medical services to approximately 7198 registered patients.

The practice is equipped for patients that are disabled or have limited mobility and there is a large car park with disabled parking available.

• All services are provided from: 291 Brant Road, Lincoln, Lincolnshire, LN5 9AB.

• The practice comprises of three GP Partners (female) and one salaried GP (male).

• The all female nursing team consists of three advanced nurse practitioners, five practice nurses, a phlebotomist and a health care assistant.

• A practice manager, assistant practice manager and a team of 13 reception and administrative staff undertake the day to day management and running of the practice.

• The practice population has a higher proportion of patients aged between 50 and 54 compared to the national and CCG average.

• The practice has core opening hours between 8am and 6.30pm every weekday. The practice provides extended hours Tuesday and Wednesdays until 8pm.

• There are appointments that can be booked in advance with GPs or nurses and appointments on the day are triaged.

• The advanced nurse practitioners (ANPs) receive all on the day appointments and home visit requests.

• The practice opted out of providing the out-of-hours service. This service is provided by the out-of-hours service accessed via the NHS 111 service. Advice on how to access the out-of-hours service is clearly displayed on the practice website, on the practice door and over the telephone when the surgery is closed.

• The practice has a sister practice nearby which shares the same staff. This practice has a separate patient list however there are plans that they may merge in the future which will enable patients with more choice and flexibility in relation to appointments.

Updated 2 June 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Brant Road Surgery on 14 April 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 however non-clinical and near misses were not included in the reporting process.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
• Procedures were in place for monitoring and managing risks to patient and staff safety.
• 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 and that the new appointment system was assisting with this.
• 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 understood the needs of the local population and planned services to meet those needs.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Review the process of reporting significant events to include non-clinical incidents and near misses.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 2 June 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.

• Performance for diabetes related indicators showed the practice had achieved 97% of targets which was higher than both the CCG average (91%) and higher than the national average (89%).

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

• All patients with long-term condition 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 clinician worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 2 June 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.

• 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 79%, which was comparable to the CCG average of 84% 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 school nurses.

Updated 2 June 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.

• The practice employed a practice nurse that was responsible for working with patients that were at risk of admission to hospital and also those that had recently been discharged.

• Falls assessment and advice was provided to patients at risk.

• The practice were linked to a care home in the area were they had patients residing at and worked closely with the care home staff to provide reviews and home visits were necessary.

Updated 2 June 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.

• Smoking cessation was offered in house, either face to face or over the telephone.

• Appointment triage and telephone consultations were available.

Updated 2 June 2016

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

• 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 including those that may have been experiencing poor mental health.

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

Updated 2 June 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.