Bowery Medical Centre

Updated 2 November 2018

Bowery Medical Centre is a family surgery situated in a deprived area of Merseyside. There were 3,905 patients on the practice list at the time of our inspection and most patients were of white British background.

The practice is one of 20 practices managed by SSP Health GPMS Ltd. There are four part-time permanent GPs. There is an advanced nurse clinician, a practice nurse and an assistant nurse practitioner. Members of clinical staff are supported by SSP Health GPMS Ltd.’s head office team for administrative support, along with the practice manager, reception and administration staff from the practice.

The practice is open 8am to 6.30pm every weekday. Patients requiring a GP outside of normal working hours are advised to contact the GP out of hours service provided by St Helen’s Rota.

Bowery Medical Centre is registered with the Care Quality Commission to carry out the following regulated activities:

Diagnostic and screening procedures,

Surgical procedures

Treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

The practice has a personal medical services contract (PMS) contract and had enhanced services contracts for example, childhood vaccinations.

Updated 2 November 2018

This practice is rated as Good overall. The practice was previously inspected on 22 September 2015 and rated good overall.

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? –Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the Bowery Medical Centre on 12 October 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

• The provider’s central team of support staff at their head office carried out most of the administration work, which freed up staff at the practice to concentrate on providing clinical services.
• The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
• Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. The practice worked towards reducing social isolation by having regular charity events, such as coffee mornings. Staff also participated in charitable events.
• Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they could access care when they needed it.
• Information about services and how to complain was available. The practice sought patient views about improvements that could be made to the service, including having a well- established patient participation group (PPG) and acted on feedback.
• Staff worked well together as a team and all felt supported to carry out their roles.
• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the practice.
• The practice complied with the Duty of Candour.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

• The practice proactively managed patients who might require additional support by having staff who were responsible for ensuring patients’ ongoing needs were met. For example, there was a Bereavement Champion, a Patient Liaison Officer; and a Cancer Care Champion who telephoned all newly diagnosed cancer patients to ensure they were receiving appointments and the relevant support required. In addition, the practice had an ‘important patient register’, which was regularly reviewed to ensure patients who were more vulnerable for a variety of reasons (for example military veterans and those at increased risk of self-harm), were given prompt access to a GP should the need arise.
• Lead clinicians wrote reports on medicines safety alerts which included a synopsis about the advice to give to patients; details of the numbers of patients affected by the alert and how the practice had responded, and whether a re-audit was necessary. These reports were discussed and available to all clinicians.

Updated 2 November 2018

Updated 2 November 2018

Updated 2 November 2018

Updated 2 November 2018

Updated 2 November 2018

Updated 2 November 2018