Archived: Dr Olumuyiwa Ojo-Aromokudu

Updated 20 July 2016

Dr Olumuyiwa Ojo-Aromokudu (also known as Gossoms End Surgery) situated in Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire is a GP practice which provides primary medical care for approximately 2,400 patients living in Berkhamsted and surrounding areas.

Dr Olumuyiwa Ojo-Aromokudu provides primary care services to local communities under a Personal Medical Services (PMS) contract, which is a contract between general practices and NHS England for delivering primary care services. The practice population is predominantly white British along with a small ethnic population of Asian Polish and other Eastern European origin. The practice has a large population of working age patients with young families.

The practice has one male principal GP and a female salaried GP. There are two practice nurses. There is a practice manager who is supported by a team of administrative and reception staff. The local NHS trust provides health visiting and community nursing services to patients at this practice.

There is onsite parking available with adequate parking for those patients with mobility issues.

The practice is open Monday Friday from 8am to 6.30pm except on Tuesday when the practice is open until 7.45pm. The practice offers a variety of access routes including telephone appointments, on the day appointments and advance pre bookable appointments.

When the practice is closed services are provided by Herts Urgent Care via the 111 service.

Updated 20 July 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Olumuyiwa Ojo-Aromokudu (also known as Gossoms End Surgery) on 12 May 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

• 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.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 20 July 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions.

• Nursing staff supported by the principal GP had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

• Performance for diabetes related indicators were better than the national average. For example, the percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, in whom the last blood glucose reading showed good control in the preceding 12 months (01/04/2014 to 31/03/2015), was 84%, where the CCG the national average was 78%.

• 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 20 July 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 78%, which was comparable to the CCG average of 75% and the national average of 74%.

• 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.

• The practice provided a variety of health promotion information leaflets and resources for this population group for example the discreet provision of chlamydia testing kits.

Updated 20 July 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.

• All patients over 75 had a named GP.

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

• The practice worked closely with Community Nursing Team and coordinated care at home such as for blood tests and wound dressings.

• The practice had identified older patients at high risk of admissions to hospital (patients with multiple complex needs, and involving multiple agencies) and worked with the Dacorum Holistic Health Care Team to coordinate their care.

• The practice provided a vaccination service for the housebound.

Updated 20 July 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.

• The practice offered late evening appointments on Tuesday until 7.45pm for working patients and those who could not attend during normal opening hours. These included practice nurse appointments for cervical screening travel advice or new patient checks.

• The practice provided telephone consultations through a GP ring back service at the patient’s request where appropriate.

• The practice offered pre bookable appointments up to three months in advance which could be booked in person by telephone or online.

• The practice offered NHS Health checks smoking cessation advice and travel immunisations.

• The practice had enrolled in the Electronic Prescribing Service (EPS). This service enabled GPs to send prescriptions electronically to a pharmacy of the patient’s choice.

Updated 20 July 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 their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months which was above the national average.

• The practice offered annual reviews to all patients on the mental health register which included physical checks.

• 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 hosted a counsellor from the local Wellbeing Team who offered weekly appointments for cognitive behavioural therapy. This service was open to both practice patients and those from other practices in the locality.

• Patients attending the hospital memory clinic with a diagnosis of dementia and who were stabilised on their medication were managed by the practice avoiding frequent visits to the hospital clinic.

• 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 20 July 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.

• 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.

• The principal GP held a joint monthly clinic with a specialist nurse from the Community Drug and Alcohol team. Patient care needs were jointly reviewed where care needs and plans were agreed including any medicines prescribed.

• The practice held regular review meetings involving district nurses, GP’s and the local palliative care nurses for people that require end of life care and those on the palliative care register.

• 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.

• The practice identified patients who were also carers and signposted them to appropriate support.