Archived: Dr Hampson & Partners Also known as Greenmount Medical Centre

Updated 7 October 2016

Greenmount Medical Centre is located in Greenmount Bury. The practice is a purpose built single story building. There is a car park for 12 cars with one disabled parking bays. There are good public transport links with bus stops nearby.

The practice has six GP partners (three male and three female), an advanced nurse practitioner (full time), three practice nurses and a telephone triage nurse and a health care assistant (all part time). There is a practice manager and a team of administration staff include 3 data administrators.

The practice is a training and teaching practice (Teaching practices take medical students and training practices have GP trainees and F2 doctors). All partners are or have been GP trainers.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday, Wednesday and Friday, and between 7am and 6.30pm Tuesday and Thursday. Appointments are available between 8am and 6.30pm daily and from 7am on Tuesday and Thursday.

The practice is part of the Bury extended working hours scheme which means patients can access a designated GP service in the Bury area from 6.30pm to 8.00pm Monday to Friday and from 8am to 6pm on Saturdays, Sundays and bank holidays.

Patients requiring a GP outside of normal working hours are advised to call 111. 

The practice has a Personal Medical Services (PMS) contract. The PMS contract is the contract between general practices and NHS England for delivering primary care services to local communities.

There are 10,134 patients registered at the practice of which 8.7% are over 75 years of age.

Updated 7 October 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced  comprehensive inspection at Greenmount Medical Centre on 16 August 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.
• There was an active patient participation group. We were informed they received good support from the practice staff and their views were listened to and taken on board where possible.
• The practice was above average for its satisfaction scores on consultations with GPs and nurses.
• There was a strong ethos for education and a programme of support and training for trainee GPs. The practice has received multiple awards from Manchester University for the standard of education and support given to medical students.
• A member of staff was appointed as a dementia champion. They worked closely with the carers champion in offering support and advice as needed.

• The practice was part of the Primary Care Quality Scheme for 2015 /16 – NHS Bury CCG. The outcome indicated that the practice had the best overall performance in Bury.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 7 October 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.
• 91% of patients on the diabetes register had a foot examination and risk classification within the preceding 12 months. This was the same as the CCG average and above the national average of 88%.
• 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.
• The management and monitoring of patients with long term conditions was continuously monitored.
• Patients with long term conditions which may leave them at increased risk of hospital admission were covered by the ‘Unplanned Admission’ scheme.

Updated 7 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.
• Midwives held weekly clinics at the practice along with child development clinics. Immunisation rates were 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.
• Data indicated that the practice was above average in cervical screening compared to CCG and national average. 81%of female patients aged 25 to 64 years, attended a cervical screening test within a target period of 3.5 years or 5.5 years.This compared to the CCG average of 76% and the national average of 74%.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• The practice offered coil checks, removals, changes and fittings. Implants were referred to the local family planning clinics.
• There was a robust safeguarding system in place with a lead clinician appointed for the overall responsibility.  All staff were up to date with safeguarding training

Updated 7 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.
• Older patients had a named and accountable GP
• The building was accessible for patients who may have mobility problems and the practice had a wheelchair for use if required.
• Influenza and pneumonia vaccination clinics were available to patients over 65 years.  Data indicated that 98% of patients  with diabetes, on practice register, had an influenza immunisation in the preceding 12 months compared to the CCG average of 97% and the national average of 94%. 

Updated 7 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 on line services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflected the needs for this age group. For example, 32% of patients had active on-line accounts compared with a national target of 10%
• Early morning appointments were available.
• The practice actively promoted NHS health checks.  The practice was a high outlier within the CCG with the second highest uptake rate for NHS health checks. 
• There was an active programme for bowel and aortic aneurysm screening. There was an active follow up process for patients who did not attend their appointment. Data indicated the practice was above average for bowel screening compared to CCG and national average. For example, 67.1% of patients aged 60-69 were screened for bowel cancer in last 30 months. This compared to the CCG and national average of 58%.

Updated 7 October 2016

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

• Performance for mental health related indicators indicated the practice was above average when compared to the CCG and national average. 99% of patients diagnosed with dementia who had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months. This compared to the CCG average of 89% and the national average of 84%.
• 89% of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in the record, in the preceding 12 months. This compared to the CCG average of 91% and 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.
• Annual reviews were available for patients with complex mental health needs with care plans.
• 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 A & E where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.
• Staff were trained and had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia. One of the GPs took responsibility for supporting patients with dementia and a member of the reception staff was appointed as a carer’s champion. They offered additional support to carers and provided information and advice as needed.
• A member of staff was appointed as a dementia champion. They worked closely with the carers champion in offering support and advice as needed.
• Longer appointments were provided as needed and double appointments (30 minutes) were provided for patients with a learning disability.
• The practice is a member of the local Dementia Action alliance and has signed up to the National Dementia Declaration.

Updated 7 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 homeless people, travellers and those with a learning disability.
• Patients had a named GP who worked in partnership with them to develop an individual care plan to reflect their current care needs. An annual review of their care was carried out.
• 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 in order to promote good health care.
• 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. All staff were up to date with current safeguarding guidelines for both adult and children.
• GP’s worked with and referred patients to local drug and alcohol services.
• Patients had access to a programme of exercise on prescription and were supported by a health trainer. There was also a weekly walking group for patients.