Archived: Heath Hill Surgery

Updated 17 September 2015

Heath Hill Surgery is located in a three storey premises in a semi-rural area. It provides primary medical services to approximately 7200 registered patients. The practice has 18 staff, including five GP partners (one partner is salaried); two male GPs and three female GPs, practice nurses, administration, reception and management staff. The practice has a higher proportion of patients over the age of 40 years and between 10-15 years compared to the local clinical commissioning group (CCG) average and a lower proportion in 20-39 years age group. The practice serves a population which is more affluent than the national average.

We visited the practice location at 54 Heath Hill Road South, Crowthorne, Berkshire RG45 7BN

The practice has opted out of providing out-of-hours services to its own patients and uses the services of a local out-of-hours service.

The practice holds a General Medical Services (GMS) contract. GMS contracts are centrally negotiated for all GP practices in England.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 8am to 12.30pm every morning and 3.50pm to 5.40pm daily. Patients needing to be seen urgently are seen by the duty doctor or after the last booked appointments.

Extended hours surgeries are offered at the following times 8.20am to 11.50am on alternate Saturday mornings.

Updated 17 September 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

Our previous inspection in October 2014 found breaches of regulation relating to the safe, effective and well-led delivery of services.

We found the practice required improvement for the provision of safe, effective and well-led services, and was rated good for providing caring and responsive services. Consequently we rated all population groups as requiring improvement.

This inspection was undertaken to check the practice was meeting regulations. For this reason we have only rated the location for the key questions to which these relate. This report should be read in conjunction with the full inspection report of 23 October 2014.

We found the practice had made improvements since our last inspection. At our inspection on the 16 July 2015 we found the practice was meeting the regulation that had previously been breached.

Specifically we found:

• The practice had instituted systems to manage medicines and prescribing and had appointed one of the GPs as lead in medicines management.
• Staff were complying with the practice control of infection policy.
• Improvements had been made to protect the confidentiality of patient information..
• The practice was actively identifying, assessing and managing risks to health and safety of patients, staff and visitors.

We have amended the rating for this practice to reflect these changes. The practice is now rated good for the provision of safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led services.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 17 September 2015

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. Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed. All these patients were offered a structured annual review to check that their health and medication needs were being met. For those people with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 17 September 2015

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 on the at risk register. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. We saw good examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 17 September 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients were good for conditions commonly found in older people. The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population and had a range of enhanced services, for example, in end of life care. It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 17 September 2015

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.

Updated 17 September 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of patients experiencing poor mental health (including patients with dementia). Twenty four out of 34 patients with poor mental health had a care plan in place. 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 a system in place to follow up on patients who had been discharged from hospital to support them in the community.

Updated 17 September 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of patients 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 and 25 out of 27 of these patients had received a follow-up. The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. The practice had sign-posted vulnerable patients to various support groups and third sector 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 and out of hours.