Drs Mirza, Sukhani and Partners

Updated 11 June 2015

Drs Mirza, Sukhani and Partners provide a range of primary medical services for people in Hockwell Ring in the Leagrave area of Luton, and serve a registered population of approximately 5487 patients. The practice population consists predominantly of mixed ethnic minority groups with some levels of socio economic disparity, language barriers and different religious and cultural needs.

Clinical staff at this practice include three GP partners, one salaried GP, one practice nurse and one healthcare assistant. Management, administration and reception staff support the practice. Community nurses, health visitors and a midwife from the local NHS trust also provide a service at this practice. A mix of male and female clinical staff is available.

When the surgery is closed out of hours care is accessed through the NHS 111 service.

Updated 11 June 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Drs Mirza, Sukhani and Partners on 28 November 2014.

The practice achieved an overall rating of Good. This was based on our rating of all of the five domains. Each of the six population groups we looked at achieved the same good rating.

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to recruitment checks.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
• 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.
• 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.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should

• Carry through the practice plan to replace the remaining carpeted areas with vinyl flooring
• Ensure all staff are familiar with fire evacuation procedures
• Ensure multidisciplinary team meetings are arranged to discuss and provide for the needs of the palliative care patient

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 11 June 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions. Nursing staff assisted GPs with lead roles in chronic disease management and patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority. Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed. All these patients had a named GP and a structured annual review to check that their health and medication needs were being met. For those people with the most complex needs, the named GP worked with relevant health and care professionals to deliver a multidisciplinary package of care.

Updated 11 June 2015

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. 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. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. We saw good examples of joint working with midwives and health visitors.

Updated 11 June 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients were good for conditions commonly found in older people. The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population and had a range of enhanced services, for example, in dementia and end of life care. It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Updated 11 June 2015

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 11 June 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia. It 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 including MIND and SANE. It had a system in place to follow up patients who had attended accident and emergency (A&E) where they may have been experiencing poor mental health.

Updated 11 June 2015

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 and those with a learning disability. It had carried out annual health checks for people with a learning disability. It offered longer appointments for people with a learning disability.

The practice regularly liaised with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. It had told 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.