West Heath Surgery

Updated 31 January 2017

West Heath Surgery is a GP practice, which provides primary medical services to Birmingham South Central Clinical Commissioning Group commission the practice’s services.

The practice has three GP partners (male) and five salaried GPs (two female and three male). The nursing team consists of two practice nurses and three health care assistants. They are supported by a Managing Partner, Assistant Manager, Reception Manager and a team of reception staff and administrative staff.

The practice is open between 8am and 8pm Monday to Friday; the practice also opens at 7.15am on Wednesdays and between 8am and 3pm on Saturdays and Sundays. Appointments are available from every morning and afternoon throughout the day. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that can be booked up to eight weeks in advance, urgent appointments are also available for people that need them.

Patients can access out of hours support from the national advice service NHS 111, where telephone advice may be offered or alternatively an appointment at the GP Primary Care Centre at Selly Oak or a home visit would be offered.

The practice is an approved training practice for the training of trainee doctors and medical students.

Updated 31 January 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at West Heath Surgery on 13 December 2016. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

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

• There was an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events and lessons were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice.

• The practice were proactive in taking action where safeguarding concerns were raised and discussing these with relevant family members and external stakeholders, for example social services and the Care Quality Commission.

• Staff assessed needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.

• Clinical audit was integrated within the practices’ governance system in order to evaluate the services and quality of care provided.

• The practice identified patients who may be in need of extra support and signposted them to the relevant service.

• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.

• The practice had identified 44 patients as carers (0.7% of the practice list) and written information was available to direct carers to the various avenues of support available to them.

• Patients could access appointments and services in a way and at a time that suited them. The practice offered extended hours for patients that could not attend during normal opening hours.

• 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.

• The practice had a clear vision and strategy to deliver high quality care and promote good outcomes for patients.

• The practice had a proactive approach to succession planning in the practice and was part of a project to create Kingsman College, which provided training for medical secretaries, practice management and phlebotomy.

• Management were enthusiastic about upskilling and empowering staff members.

• There was a clear leadership structure and a number of policies and procedures to govern activity and held regular governance meetings.

• There was an overarching governance framework which supported the delivery of the strategy and good quality care.

• Staff said they felt valued and supported and were encouraged to identify opportunities to improve the service delivered by the practice.

• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels and actively took part in local pilot schemes to improve outcomes for patients in the area.

• GPs had direct access to book appointments for with a Care Navigator for patients whose needs identified they would benefit from this support.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• The practice had a proactive approach to succession planning in the practice and was part of a project to create Kingsman College. The college provided training for medical secretaries, practice management and phlebotomy and intended to extend training courses that were provided to include nurses, pharmacists and associate physicists.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Continue to identify if a patient is a carer and provide appropriate support and guidance, as relevant.

• Continue to encourage patients to attend national screening programmes for bowel and breast cancer screening.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 31 January 2017

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

• Nursing staff had lead roles in chronic disease management.

• Patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority and appropriate support was provided including personalised care plans.

• 87% of those diagnosed with diabetes had a blood test to assess diabetes control (looking at how blood sugar levels have been averaging over recent weeks) compared to the national average of 78%.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

• All these patients had a named GP and were offered 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.

• The practice hosted a pulmonary rehabilitation course, which ran for 12 weeks at a time.

• Diabetes education classes had recently been introduced for patients to receive additional support and guidance in managing their condition.

Updated 31 January 2017

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 comparable to local and national averages for all standard childhood immunisations.

• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 71%, which was comparable to the CCG average of 66% and the national average of 74%.

• The practice encouraged attendance for national screening programmes for bowel and breast cancer screening. Although data for 2014/15 showed the practice was lower than the national averages and in line with local averages.

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

• Breast feeding and baby changing facilities were also available at the practice.

• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 31 January 2017

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.

• GPs had direct access to book appointments for with a Care Navigator for patients whose needs identified they would benefit from this support.

Updated 31 January 2017

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 to book appointments and request repeat prescriptions.

• A full range of health promotion and screening was offered that reflected the needs for this age group.

• The practice had a 63% uptake in 2015/16 from those that were eligible for an NHS health check.

• The practice was part of a pilot to introduce a digital channel of support and guidance to patients. This included an application for mobile phones, which would aid patients to book appointments, access medical records and request repeat prescriptions.

Updated 31 January 2017

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

• 93% of those with a diagnosis of schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder or other had a comprehensive and agreed care plan in place, compared to the national average of 89%.

• 82% of patients with a diagnosis of dementia had their care reviewed in a face-to-face review, compared 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 living with dementia.

• The practice held registers of patients experiencing poor mental health and those with a diagnosis of dementia and ensured they were offered a review each year.

• 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.

• The practice hosted a range of services to increase the availability of relevant services to its practice population. For example, counselling, alcohol and drug services and Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) services.

• All staff had received dementia awareness training.

Updated 31 January 2017

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 and those with a learning disability.

• The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability and an annual health check.

• 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 and were aware of their responsibilities.

• Clinical staff understood and were able to evidence how they assessed best interest for a patient, in conjunction with the relevant health and social care professionals.