The Glen Medical Group

Updated 7 December 2016

The Glen Medical Group provides Primary Medical Services to the town of Hebburn from The Glen Primary Care Centre, Glen Street, Hebburn, Tyne and Wear, NE31 1NU.

There are two separate GP practices based in one location for whom the provider provides services for both;

• The Glen Medical Group.

• The Park Surgery.

  We inspected both practices on the same day.

  The provider has two separate contracts with NHS England. The Glen Medical Group is Personal Medical Services (PMS) contract and The Park Surgery an Alternative Provider Medical Services (APMS) contract. We have provided a separate inspection report for The Park Surgery. All data in this report refers to The Glen Medical Group only.

The Glen Medical Group provides services to approximately 7,877 patients of all ages. The surgery is located in purpose built premises, which is shared with community secondary health care services. There is step free access at the front of the building and all patient facilities for the practice are on the ground floor with full disabled access. There is a large car park to the rear of the building including dedicated disabled parking bays and a bicycle rack.

The practice has three GP partners and three salaried GPs. Four are female and two male. Two of the GPs work part-time and the whole time equivalent of GPs is 5.1 or 46 sessions per week. The practice is a training practice which has GP trainees allocated to them (fully qualified doctors allocated to the practice as part of a three-year postgraduate general practice vocational training programme). There are two practice nurses who are part time with a whole time equivalent of 1.6 and one health care assistant. There is a practice manager and 17 members of administration staff.

Both The Glen Medical Group and The Park Surgery services are integrated, and are provided by the same set of staff in the same location. There is one telephone system for both practices. However, there are two clinical computer systems which run side by side, one for each practice. Significant events and complaints information were also recorded separately for each practice.

The practice is part of South Tyneside clinical commissioning group (CCG). Information taken from Public Health England placed the area in which the practice was located in the third most deprived decile. In general, people living in more deprived areas tend to have greater need for health services.

The practice is open weekdays from 8am and until 6.30pm Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. There are extended opening hours until 8pm on Thursday evenings. The telephone system is managed by the out of hour’s service between 8am and 8.30am and 6am and 6.30pm.

Consulting times with the GPs and nurses range from 8.30am – 11.30am and 1.50pm – 4.50pm. On extended opening days consulting times run from 6.30pm – 7.40pm.

The service for patients requiring urgent medical attention out of hours is provided by the NHS 111 service and Vocare known locally as Northern Doctors Urgent Care Limited.

Updated 7 December 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Glen Medical Group on 20 October 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

There are two separate GP practices based in one location for whom the provider provides services for both, The Glen Medical Group and The Park Surgery. We inspected both practices on the same day. They have two separate contracts with NHS England; The Glen Medical Group is Personal Medical Services (PMS) contract and The Park Surgery an Alternative Provider Medical Services (APMS) contract. We have provided a separate inspection report for The Park Surgery. All data in this report refers to The Glen Medical Group only.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and report incidents and near misses.

• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

• Outcomes for patients who use services were good.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance.
• Staff were consistent and proactive in supporting patients to live healthier lives through a targeted approach to health promotion. Information was provided to patients to help them understand the care and treatment available.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• The practice had a system in place for handling complaints and concerns and responded to any complaints which was in line with recognised guidance and contractual obligations for GPs in England.
• The practice had a system in place for handling complaints and concerns and responded to any complaints which was in line with recognised guidance and contractual obligations for GPs in England.
• There were low satisfaction rates from the GP National Survey for patient’s experience of getting through to the surgery by telephone, making an appointment and the waiting time for consultations. Patients also provided similar feedback to us when we spoke with them via completed CQC comment cards. The practice had devised an action plan to address this, which was appropriate and staff were taking active steps to implement it.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
• There was a clear leadership structure in place and staff felt supported by management. The practice sought feedback from staff and patients, which they acted on.
• Staff throughout the practice worked well together as a team.
• The practice was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour regulation.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Continuing to review the processes for making appointments easier for patients to access.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 7 December 2016

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

Nationally reported Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data (2014/15) showed the practice had achieved good outcomes in relation to the conditions commonly associated with this population group. For example, performance for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) related indicators were above the national average (100% compared to 96% nationally).

The practice had a register of patient with long term conditions which they monitored closely for annual call and recall appointment for health checks. There were longer appointments available for these clinics. Extended opening hours and home visits were available when needed.

The local clinical commissioning group (CCG) led a ‘better outcomes project’ (BOS) which the practice were part of. This aimed to improve outcomes in relation to those patients with long term conditions in terms of screening, new diagnosis and the management of the conditions, with bespoke care plans.

Updated 7 December 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. There were regular six weekly safeguarding meetings at the practice.

The practice were to carry out a survey to gain the views of young people and to promote young person’s services. They planned to have a dedicated website area and a notice board in the practice for young people. A young person’s champion had been appointed from the reception team.

The practice were one of the first in the locality to use social media to keep patients updated with health information.

Childhood immunisation rates for the vaccinations given were in line with CCG/national averages. For example, childhood immunisation rates for the vaccinations given to under two year olds were 99% except for infant Men C which was 24.5%, the same as the CCG average. For five year olds from 97% to 100%, compared to CCG averages of 96% to 99%.

The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 94%, which was above the national average of 82%.

Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.

Updated 7 December 2016

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.

The practice had a volunteer group called ‘patient champions’ who used local skills and knowledge to help specific groups. This included running a stretch class for an hour every week, which was attended by approximately 20 patients. This also provided social benefits for those attending. Age UK had also facilitated IT training for elderly patients at the practice.

The practice provided care to three local care homes where they carried out a structured visit every two weeks, usually by the same GP. They believed this had reduced need for unplanned admissions to hospital and had improved their relationship with the care homes, who felt they could now contact the practice in case of need more easily.

All patients over the age of 75 had a named GP. The practice offered home visits usually by the same GP. Prescriptions could be sent to any local pharmacy electronically. The practice had a palliative care register which was discussed at the monthly clinical meeting.

Updated 7 December 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 which included appointment booking, test results and ordering repeat prescriptions. There was a full range of health promotion and screening that reflected the needs for this age group.

Flexible appointments, including telephone appointments, were available as well as extended opening hours. The practice had recently introduced a ‘brief appointment slot’ as a way of being able to see patients quickly who did not require a long appointment.

Updated 7 December 2016

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

The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health.

The practice maintained a register of patients experiencing poor mental health and recalled them for at least an annual review. Patients with dementia were reviewed annually and offered a care plan in relation to their condition. Patients were told how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations.

Performance for mental health related indicators was better than national average. For example, p erformance for dementia indicators was above the national average (100% compared to 94.5% nationally).

The practice had appointed a dementia friends champion to drive dementia friendliness throughout the surgery. All staff were to receive dementia friends training and the practice intended to support a dementia friendly initiative in the local town.

Updated 7 December 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. They were part of the local CCG BOS which aimed to improve outcomes in relation to vulnerable high risk groups.

The practice were a methodone prescribing practice. They had a close working relationship with local drug and alcohol workers who consulted with patients at the practice with two of the GPs who had an interest in this area of care.

The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. They told 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.

The practice’s computer system alerted GPs if a patient was a carer. They had a practice carers’ champion who was proactive in identifying carers. There were 94 patients registered as a carer which was 1.2% of the practice population. Written information was available for carers to ensure they understood the various avenues of support available to them. The practice had close links with the local carers’ organisation.