Archived: Kingfisher Medical Centre

Updated 17 May 2017

Kingfisher Medical Centre has two surgeries: Kingfisher Medical Centre and Surrey Docks Health Centre in Lewisham, south London. Patients can visit either location and the same staff (apart from one receptionist) work at both surgeries. Both buildings are purpose-built. The Surrey Docks Health Centre building also houses another GP practice and a number of community services. Although parking is limited at both sites, the area is well-served by public transport.

Two doctors work permanently at the practice: one male and one female. They are both partners. There is one GP who works as a regular locum (who is male). Not all of the GPs work full-time. Full time doctors work eight sessions per week. The practice has 18 GP sessions per week.

There is one female practice nurse who works part-time (20 hours per week).

The practice is open for telephone calls (at both locations) from 8.00am to 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Reception is open from 8.30am to 6.30pm.

Appointments are available from 9am to 12.30pm and 3.30pm to 6.30pm Monday to Wednesday. On Thursday appointments are available from 9am to 12.30pm, and on Friday from 9am to 12.00pm and 3.30pm to 6pm. Appointments are also available from 6.30pm to 7.30pm on Monday evenings. When the practice is closed cover is provided by a local out-of-hours care provider.

There are approximately 4682 patients at the practice. Compared to the England average, the practice has more young children as patients (age up to nine) and fewer older children (age 10 – 19). There are more patients aged 20 – 49, and many fewer patients aged 50+ than at an average GP practice in England.

Life expectancy of the patients at the practice is in line with CCG and national averages. The practice population scores highly on national measures of deprivation: with a score of three out of ten (with one being the most deprived), and high scores on measures of income deprivation affecting older people and children. Compared to the English average, many more patients are unemployed.

The practice has large number of patients who moved to London from Vietnam in the mass emigrations of the the 1970s and 1980s, and who speak Vietnamese as their first language.

The practice holds a General Medical Service (GMS) contract and is registered with the CQC to provide diagnostic and screening procedures, maternity and midwifery services, surgical procedures, treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The practice is based in the Lewisham Clinical Commissioning Group area.

Updated 17 May 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Kingfisher Medical Centre on 1 June 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report on the June 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Kingfisher Medical Centre  on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was a desk-based review carried out on 4 April 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 1 June 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

• There had been an increase in quality improvement activity. The number of audits carried out had increased, and two had been completed to check that improvement had been made.
• A new staff member had received an induction and the three staff members' files we checked had received annual appraisals.
• The five staff members' files we checked had received the essential training for their role. Some of the training we recommended had been undertaken only recently.
• Action had been taken on all of the areas we identified for improvement. This included the identification of patients with caring responsibilities. The practice sent us evidence of new posters in the practice premises and on the website. The number of carers identified had increased from 35 to 37. This was still under 1% of the practice list.

There were some areas where the provider should continue to make improvements.

The provider should:

• Continue to develop the quality improvement programme, completing audits to confirm that improvements have been made and sustained.

• Develop an effective system to ensure that all training is undertaken and updated at recommended intervals.

• Review how patients with caring responsibilities are identified and recorded on the clinical system to ensure information, advice and support is made available to them.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 6 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.
• Performance for diabetes related indicators was mixed, with performance in most areas in line with national average, but fewer than average numbers of patients were recorded as having well-controlled blood sugar.
• 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 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. 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.
• 78% of women aged 25 - 64 had a cervical screening test in the last five years, compared to 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 6 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.

Updated 6 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 online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflects the needs for this age group.
• Fewer patients than from other practices attended for cancer screening tests. For example, 54% of women aged between 50 and 70 were screened for breast cancer screening (compared to the CCG average of 63% and the national average of 72%).

Updated 6 October 2016

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

• 83% 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 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 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.
• 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.