Daleham Gardens Health Centre

Updated 18 March 2016

The practice operates from premises it shares with other health care providers at 5 Daleham Gardens, London NW3 5BY, close to Swiss Cottage in Camden. It is a short distance from bus, tube and overground rail services.

The practice provides NHS services through a Primary Medical Services (PMS) contract to approximately 2,500 patients. It is part of the NHS Camden Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) which is made up of 40 general practices. The practice is registered with the CQC to undertake the following regulated activities - diagnostic and screening procedures, maternity and midwifery services, treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

The practice list has a higher than average number of older patients and children under 5 years old. Its working age patients are usually employed in high income occupations. In relation to the patient demography, it is now one of the least deprived practices in Camden.

The practice’s clinical staff comprises two GP partners (female and male), working 30 and 25 hours per week. There is a practice nurse, who works 16 hours a week. It is an approved training practice and currently one GP Registrar works there. The practice’s administrative team is made up of a practice manager and assistant, and three receptionist / administrators.

The practice’s opening hours are 9.00am to 12.00 noon and 2.30pm to 6.00pm on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. On Thursday it opens only during the morning; and it is closed at weekends. Appointments are 15 minutes long and commence at 9.30 for the morning sessions and 3.00pm during the afternoon. Telephone consultations and home visits are available. Appointments can be booked online by patients who have previously registered to use the facility.

The practice has opted out of providing an out-of-hours service. Patients calling the practice when it is closed are connected with the local out-of-hours service provider. There is a link to the NHS 111 service on the practice website and relevant information is included in the practice leaflet.  

Updated 18 March 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 20 January 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• 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.

• Evidence showed that clinical results were generally above, or comparable, to local and national averages.

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

• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with their preferred GPs, that 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 provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

The area where the provider should make improvement is:

• Continue with efforts to set up an effective patient participation group, allowing patients more involvement in making suggestions and decisions regarding the service.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 18 March 2016

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

• Clinical staff had lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.

• Fifty-one patients (89% of 64 patients on the diabetes register) had received an annual foot check so far this year; sixty-three patients (98%) had received a check in 2014/15.

• Twelve out of 13 patients on the practice’s heart failure register had received an annual medicines review.

• 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.

• Flu vaccination rates for patients identified as at risk were 46%, being comparable with the national average.

Updated 18 March 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.

• The percentage of patients with asthma, on the register, who have had an asthma review in the preceding 12 months was 87% compared with the national average of 75%.

• 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 90% which was 8% above the national average.

• 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.

Updated 18 March 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 maintained registers of patients identified as being at medium risk, high risk and very high risk of hospital admission. Patients discharged from hospital were followed up within a few days.

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

• Flu vaccination rates for patients aged over-65 were 72%, being comparable with the national average.

Updated 18 March 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 blood pressure checks to patients aged over-45 and had carried out tests on 827 patients, being 88% of those eligible.

Updated 18 March 2016

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

• The practice maintained a register of 14 patients with dementia. All of whom had had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is above the national average of 84%.

• The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive, agreed care plan was 95% compared to the national average 88%.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people 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 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 18 March 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 homeless people, and those with a learning disability.

• There was currently one patient on the practice’s learning disabilities register, for whom an annual health check had been carried out.

• The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.

• Homeless patients could register using the practice address.

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

• 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.