Drs Joughin, Jones, Blaylock & Zamoyski Also known as Throckley Primary Care

Updated 12 March 2020

Drs Joughin, Jones, Blaylock & Zamoyski are registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide primary care services. They are located in Throckley. The practice provides services to around 6500 patients from one location; Throckley Primary Care Centre, Tillmouth Park Road, Throckley,Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE15 9PA.

We visited Throckley Primary Care Centre as part of the inspection. The practice has four GP Partners, two nurses, two healthcare assistants, one clinical pharmacist, one practice manager and administrative staff

The practice is part of Newcastle and Gateshead clinical commissioning group (CCG). The practice is situated in an area of relatively high levels of deprivation. 21.55% of their patients are over 65 with the average in England being about 17.4%. Male and female life expectancy is around the average for England.

The practice is located in a purpose-built Primary Care Centre. All patient facilities are easily accessible and it has a large parking area.

Practice opening times are between 8.30am and 6.30pm Monday, Wednesday and Friday, Tuesday 8.30 – 7pm and Thursday and 7.30 – 6pm. They are also open one Saturday per month between 9 – 11am. Patients can book appointments in person, electronically or by telephone.

The practice provides services to patients of all ages based on a General Medical Services (GMS) contract agreement for general practice. The service for patients requiring urgent medical attention out of hours is provided via the 111 service.

Updated 12 March 2020

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Drs Joughin, Jones, Blaylock & Zamoyski on 8 January 2020. We looked at whether the service was safe, effective and well led. We did not specifically inspect the caring or responsive key questions and therefore the ratings remain unchanged based on the findings from the previous inspection in 2015.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

• What we found when we inspected
• Information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
• Information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as Good overall.

• The practice had a clear vision with quality and safety as a priority.
• The practice had met the World Health Organisation targets for childhood immunisations and vaccines.
• The practice kept vulnerable people safe.
• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
• Health and safety, fire safety and infection control checks and audits were completed for all sites.
• Patients commented that staff were caring and professional.
• Staff were well trained and competent in the delivery of good patient care.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Updated 23 April 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people with long-term conditions. Emergency processes were in place and referrals made for patients in this group that had a sudden deterioration in health. When needed, longer appointments and home visits were available. Patients had reviews to check their health and medication needs were being met. The practice aimed to complete reviews for patients with more than one long-term condition at the same appointment; reducing the need for patients to attend on multiple occasions.

For those people with the most complex needs the GPs worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care. One of the practice’s Primary Health Care Team (PHCT) meetings each month was dedicated to adults and agenda items included many areas relevant to the care of people with long-term conditions. For example, reviews of any new cancer diagnoses.

Updated 23 April 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of families, children and young people. One of the practice’s Primary Health Care Team (PHCT) meetings each month was dedicated to children and young people. The health visitors and midwife attached to the practice attended this meeting. Matters discussed included births, postnatal visits, children who were looked after and children who were a cause for concern. Services for young people were also discussed at a recent Patient Participation Group (PPG) meeting.

Systems were in place for identifying and following-up children living in disadvantaged circumstances and who were at risk. For example, the practice had processes in place to identify and support local families in these circumstances.

Immunisation rates were high for all standard childhood immunisations. For example, MMR vaccination rates for five year old children were 98.9% and 96.6% for doses one and two respectively, compared to an average of 92.7% in the local CCG area for dose two.

Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age appropriate way and recognised as individuals. Some of the patients we spoke with from this population group said they didn’t like the way the appointments system operated. They said it felt like it made it more difficult for them to see a GP face to face if their child or children were unwell. All of the patients we spoke with did say they had been able to see a GP the same day if their need had been urgent. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

Co-ordinated services for families were arranged on Wednesday mornings. These included GP appointments for six week checks, practice nurse appointments for immunisations, midwife appointments for antenatal care and a health visitor drop-in clinic. This helped the practice to be flexible if problems were identified at an appointment, as other members of staff were readily available for advice or support if required.

Updated 23 April 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Nationally reported data showed the practice had good outcomes for conditions commonly found amongst older people.

The practice offered personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population. For example, all patients over the age of 75 had a named GP and patients at high risk of hospital admission had a named GP and a care plan. The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, including offering home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs. Local residential and nursing care homes had a named GP from the practice who had overall responsibility for the practice’s patients who lived there. The practice participated in the ‘Care Homes Programme’ which offered nurse support to homes to liaise with linked GP practices and other professionals, including hospitals. The programme focused on comprehensive care planning that was reviewed six monthly.

One of the practice’s Primary Health Care Team (PHCT) meetings each month was dedicated to adults and agenda items included many areas relevant to the care of older people. For example, reviews of any recent deaths and palliative care arrangements.

Updated 23 April 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of the 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 offer continuity of care. The practice was proactive in offering online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening which reflects the needs for this age group.

The practice offered extended opening hours. Appointments were available on Wednesday and Thursday mornings from 7.30am with GPs, practice nurses and healthcare assistants. Saturday morning appointments were available once a month with a GP or health care assistant. This made it easier for people of working age to get access to the service.

The appointments system operated by the practice meant patients could access a GP consultation by telephone at a time convenient to them. If they needed a face to face review, an appointment could be arranged by the GP taking into account the patient’s availability.

Updated 23 April 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). Patients experiencing poor mental health were contacted each year to arrange a mental health review. These patients were allocated to the GP who knew them best. The GP was responsible for deciding the best way to arrange an appointment. This could include the GP telephoning the patient directly to invite them into the practice.

The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health including those with dementia. The practice had care planning in place for patients with dementia. The practice had close working relationships with the local nursing and residential care homes and had good knowledge of individual patient’s needs. A good example was a large home locally that was visited weekly by the dedicated GP.

The practice had sign-posted patients experiencing poor mental health to various support groups and third sector organisations. Information and leaflets about services were made available to patients within the practice. The practice had a strong commitment to social prescribing and a GP had a special interest in this area. For patients experiencing poor mental health, the practice was able to arrange follow up for them with an organisation called ‘Moving Forward’. ‘Moving Forward’ offered support to adults who lived in Newcastle and experienced mental health needs.

Updated 23 April 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The practice held a register of patients living in vulnerable circumstances including those with learning disabilities. The practice had carried out annual health checks for people with learning disabilities. Two of the practice nurses were responsible for making sure patients were contacted and invited for a review. This would normally be done by telephone, rather than by writing them a letter. All patients with learning disabilities had a care plan and were given a copy to take away with them. The practice offered longer appointments for people, if required.

The practice worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. The practice’s Primary Health Care Team (PHCT) meetings each month for adults and children were focused on identifying and supporting vulnerable individuals and families. The practice had sign-posted vulnerable patients to various support groups and third sector organisations.

Consulting rooms within the practice were made available to other services; for example, drug and alcohol teams and domestic violence support workers. The practice recognised that for many of its vulnerable patients, the surgery was viewed as a safe place.

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 and out of hours.