St Johns Group Practice

Updated 28 December 2016

St Johns Group Practice is located on the outskirts of Doncaster town centre. The practice provide services for 9,124 patients under the terms of the NHS General Medical Services contract. The practice catchment area is classed as within the group of the third more deprived areas in England. The age profile of the practice population is similar to other GP practices in the Doncaster Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) area.

The practice has three GP partners, two male and one female. They are supported by a salaried GP, a senior nurse, a nurse prescriber, three practice nurses, two healthcare assistants, an apprentice healthcare assistant, a practice manager and a team of reception and administrative staff.

The practice is open between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday. Appointments with all staff were available during the practice opening hours. A phlebotomy service with the healthcare assistant was available daily. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that could be booked up to six weeks in advance, urgent appointments were also available for people that needed them.

When the practice is closed calls were answered by the out-of-hours service which is accessed via the surgery telephone number or by calling the NHS 111 service. 

The practice is located in a purpose built building with a lift to the first floor.  Parking spaces are available to the front of the practice.

Updated 28 December 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at St Johns Group Practice on 7 November 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.

• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients said 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 practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

We saw two areas of outstanding practice:

• The lead GP for safeguarding established good links with the school nurse team and a representative from  the team attended the practice monthly safeguarding  multidisciplinary meeting. The GP arranged for this to happen at other practices in the local area.  School nurses performed asthma checks on children and shared the results with the practice.
• To provide continuity of care, all patients with a learning disability had a named GP who performed their annual review. Staff described how patients liked this service as they were familiar with the GP and more likely to attend screening sessions. The GP developed a protocol to share with other practices.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 28 December 2016

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

• Nursing staff had lead roles in long term condition management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.
• Performance for diabetes related indicators was 4% below the CCG average and 3% above the national average.
• 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.

Updated 28 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, for example, children and young people who had a high number of accident and emergency attendances. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations.
• The lead GP for safeguarding established good links with the school nurse team and a representative from the team attended the practice monthly multidisciplinary team meeting. The GP supported other practices to establish the same arrangements. School nurses performed asthma checks on children and shared the results with the practice.
• 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 77%, which was below the CCG average of 82% and the national average of 81%.
• 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 28 December 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.

• All had a named GP.
• 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.

Updated 28 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 as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflects the needs for this age group.

Updated 28 December 2016

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

• 77% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is below the national average of 84%.
• Of those experiencing poor mental health 62% had an agreed care plan in place which was lower than the national average of 88%.  GPs were in the process of identifying those patients who did not routinely attend for long term condition reviews to contact them and establish the reasons why and encourage them to attend.
• The practice regularly worked with multidisciplinary teams in the case management of patients 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 28 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 including homeless people and those with a learning disability.
• To provide continuity of care, all patients with a learning disability had a named GP who performed their annual review. Staff described how patients liked this service as they were familiar with the GP and more likely to attend screening sessions. The GP developed a protocol to share with other practices.
• 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. 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.