Archived: South Oxford Health Centre

Updated 11 February 2016

South Oxford Health Centre has a patient list of 3800. It is located near Oxford city centre. There is a higher proportion of patients between 25 and 45 than the national average. The number of patients over 65 is significantly lower than the national average. The practice provided all services on the ground floor and was accessible to wheelchairs. There was on road parking nearby and disabled parking available for patients.

The practice is registered to provide services from: South Oxford Health Centre, Lake Street, Oxford, Oxfordshire, OX1 4RP

There are three GPs working at the practice who are all partners, including one female and two male GPs. There are two practice nurses and a healthcare assistant who also participates in providing care as part of research projects at the practice. A number of administrative staff and a practice manager support the clinical team.

The practice was open between 8.30am and 6.00pm Monday to Friday. There were was an arrangement to ensure patients could access the duty GP between 8am and 8.30am and 6pm and 6.30pm. Extended surgery hours were offered on at varying times on Saturdays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays over the course of each calendar month.

The practice is registered for the correct regulated activities in relation to the services it provides and there is a registered manager in post.

Updated 11 February 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at South Oxford Health Centre 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.
• Most risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
• Medicines were managed safely, including controlled drugs.
• 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 with a named GP and that 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 areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Review the levels of repeat prescription reviews to ensure patients receive medicine which always meet their needs.
• Implement temporary patient group or specific directives while awaiting these from the CCG.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 11 February 2016

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

• The practice followed guidance in the management of chronic diseases.
• Patients at risk of hospital admission were identified and had care plans written where appropriate.
• The practice achieved 95% on its quality outcomes framework scores in 2015 (QOF – A national monitoring tool for the performance of GP practices).
• The care of long term conditions was audited to identify where improvements in the management of a specific condition could be made.
• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.
• There was a process to offer a structured review to check patients’ 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 11 February 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. Childhood immunisation rates for the vaccinations given to under two year olds were 91% and for five year olds they were 95% compared to the local average of 89%.
• Staff were aware of the circumstances and rights when gaining consent from patients under 16.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• GPs worked with midwives and health visitors in the provision of care.

Updated 11 February 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.
• Care plans were available for patients deemed at high risk of unplanned admissions.
• Access for patients with limited mobility was good including for those with mobility scooters.
• There were named GPs for this group of patients.
• Screening for conditions which patients in this population group may be at risk of was provided, such as dementia.

Updated 11 February 2016

• 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.

• Extended hours appointments were available on various weekdays over a calendar month to provide greater flexibility to patients.

• Phone consultations were offered to patients.

• Online appointment booking was available

Updated 11 February 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 people experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.
• 89% of patients eligible for mental health care plans had one in place. The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.
• During 2015 43 patients were offered memory screening, of whom 14 have had a formal memory assessment. Five of those patients were referred to a memory clinic.

Updated 11 February 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 vulnerable patients.
• GPs 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.