Dr Gerald Eko

Updated 17 January 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Gerald Eko practice on 11 April 2016. The inspection identified areas of practice where the provider needed to make improvements. We carried out this announced follow up inspection to review the improvements made. This report only includes the areas we reviewed. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Dr Gerald Eko on our website at www.cqc.org.uk. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Following this inspection we have rated the practice as good in the safe domain.

• The practice manager confirmed that staff documented in the patient's notes whey they had acted as a chaperone. The practice had a chaperone policy that clearly instructed staff to document in the patient's notes when they had acted as a chaperone.

• The practice had a system in place to monitor and track the use of blank prescriptions within the practice.

• The practice had a policy in place that ensured the locum GP reviewed patient test results in the GPs absence.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 20 May 2016

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

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

• Performance for diabetes indicators at 94% were 10% above the CCG average and 5% below the national average.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

• All patients had a structured annual review to check their health and medicines needs were being met. For those patients with the most complex needs, the GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 20 May 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 or 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.

• Within the last 12 months 85% of patients diagnosed with asthma had received a review of their care.

• Patients told us that children and young people were treated in an age appropriate way and were recognised as individuals and we observed evidence on the day of the inspection to confirm this.

• 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 and health

Updated 20 May 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 within its population.

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

Updated 20 May 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.

Updated 20 May 2016

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

• Within the last 12 months, 95% of patients diagnosed with dementia had received a face to face review of their care. This is 14% higher than the local average and 11% higher than the national average.

• Performance in the mental health indicators was comparable with national averages.

• The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those living with dementia.

• The practice carried out advance care planning for patients living with dementia.

• Patients experiencing poor mental health had been advised 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 those living with dementia.

Updated 20 May 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, travellers and those with a learning disability.

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

• The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary 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 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.