Archived: Brighton Station Health Centre

Updated 12 July 2017

Brighton Station Health Centre is a GP treatment centre offering general practitioner, sexual health and walk-in services. The GP and walk-in services are open from 8am to 8pm seven days a week. The sexual health service provides walk in appointments from 9am to 11.45am and from 2.30pm to 6.30pm and pre-bookable appointments from 8am to 8.40am. Phone lines for the centre are open from 8am to 8pm. There is a clinical director who is an advanced nurse practitioner and a service manager who is the CQC registered manager. The service is provided by Care UK who provide central support that includes clinical and policy guidance as well as other support functions

such as clinical governance and quality assurance. There is one salaried male GP and eight self-employed GPs, one of whom works regular sessions. There are three advanced nurse practitioners currently working at the practice. At the time of inspection a further advanced nurse practitioner had been appointed while another advanced nurse practitioner position was vacant. There are additional bank advanced nurse practitioners providing the walk-in service. There are three sexual health practitioners with additional bank sexual health practitioners providing the sexual health service. There are a range of administrative and reception staff.

Services are provided from:

Aspect House

84–87 Queens Road

Brighton

East Sussex

BN1 3XE

There are approximately 6,900 registered patients within the GP practice. In addition the walk-in centre sees an average daily attendance of 65 patients and the sexual health service sees an average of 25 patients each day. The centre is contracted to provide sexual health services and the walk-in minor injury and illness service for patients across Brighton and Hove. The practice has a patient demographic where 85% of patients are aged between 20 and 49 years. Less than 7% are aged 50 and over and only 1% of patients are over the age of 65. Six percent of the patient population are under 18. Clinical prevalence of mental ill health and depression are higher than CCG and national averages and the practice has a transient population due to the walk in centre and practice location.

Updated 12 July 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

The practice is rated good overall and good for providing safe services.

We carried out an announced focused inspection of this practice on 1 March 2017. The overall rating for the practice was good. However, a breach of legal requirements was found during that inspection within the safe domain. After the focused inspection, the practice sent us an action plan detailing what they would do to meet the legal requirements. We conducted a focused inspection on 23 June 2017 to check that the provider had followed their action plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

During our previous inspection on 1 March 2017 we found the following area where the practice must improve:

• The provider did not ensure that all staff were fully aware of the protocols relating to the recording and reporting of temperatures of fridges containing medicines. The provider had not reinforced to staff the actions to be taken when there were temperatures recorded outside the recommended ranges.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

During the inspection on 23 June 2017 we found:

• The provider had systems in place to ensure that all staff were fully aware of the protocols relating to the recording and reporting of temperatures of fridges containing medicines. The provider reinforced to staff the actions to be taken when there were temperatures recorded outside of recommended ranges.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 8 November 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 better than the local and national average at 94.2% compared with 89.5% (local) and 89.2% (national).
• 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.
• Longer appointments times were available for those patients who needed them.
• The practice had commenced the proactive care service in federation with a group of GP practices in Brighton to manage those patients at greater risk of ill health and hospital admission.

Updated 8 November 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.
• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 74%, which was comparable to the CCG average of 72% and the national average of 74%.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• Contraceptive and sexual Health services were available from Sexual Health Nurse Specialists and Practice Nurses.
• Family Planning sessions were held regularly to provide a contraceptive service.

Updated 8 November 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.
• The practice demographic showed a lower than average proportion of older patients (1%) however the practice were involved in a local proactive care project to support frail and vulnerable patients and care was planned and risks managed.

Updated 8 November 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.
• Appointments were available between 8am and 8pm, seven days a week, 365 days a year.
• 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 8 November 2016

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

• 100% of patients diagnosed with dementia had had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average.
• Performance for mental health related indicators was better than the local and national average at 95.2% compared with 89.5% (local) and 92.8% (national) averages.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.
• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations. The practice worked closely with these groups and invited them to attend regular clinical meetings.
• 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 8 November 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 patients with a learning disability and others who might require it.
• Patients with a learning disability received regular reviews, however not every patient had an up to date care plan. We viewed an action plan developed by the practice to address this.
• 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.