Archived: Arksey Lane Surgery

Updated 7 April 2016

Arksey Lane Surgery is located in Bentley on the outskirts of Doncaster. The practice provides services for 5,909 patients under the terms of the NHS General Medical Services contract. The partners at this practice have another practice at Scawsby Health Centre Practice, Barnsley Road, Scawsby, Doncaster DN5 8QE. Both practices have one patient list and patients can be seen at either location. The practice catchment area for both practices is classed as within the group of the fifth less 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 is open between 8.30am to 6pm. Walk in appointments are available with GPs from 9am to 10am at Arksey Lane Surgery and from 10.15am to 11.30am at Scawsby Health Centre. Bookable afternoon appointments with GPs are available at both locations. Evening appointments with GPs are available at Scawsby Health Centre on Mondays from 6.30pm to 8pm. Bookable appointments with practice nurses, the healthcare assistant and phlebotomist are offered at various times throughout the day. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that could be booked up to four 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.

As part of the Care Quality Commission (Registration) Regulations 2009: Regulation 15 we noted GP partners registered with the Care Quality Commission as the partnership did not reflect the GP partners at the practice. We were told this this was being addressed and they were in the process of adding a new partner to their registration with us.

Updated 7 April 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Arksey Lane Surgery on 1 March 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 managed.
• 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 a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• There was a clear staff structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
• Records were not always kept up to date.  For example the practice did not have an up to date list of all training and events staff attended.  
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• The practice offered daily walk in morning appointments with GPs at Scawsby Health Centre and Arksey Lane Surgery. Patients would book into the practice on arrival and sit and wait to be seen. They told us they were often given the choice of GP they wished to see. Patients told us this service was marvellous as they did not have to telephone or contact the practice for an appointment.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Review the actions identified in the infection prevention and control audit and identify a reasonable time frame for completion which is regularly reviewed.
• Improve record keeping systems to maintain accurate records, in particular in relation to practice indemnity arrangements and new patient group directives.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 7 April 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. The practice reviewed patients at risk of hospital admission every two weeks along with two other practices in the area to ensure the best care for the patient.
• Performance for diabetes related indicators was 93% which was 3% below the CCG average and 4% 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 7 April 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 number of patients diagnosed with asthma who had a review in the the last 12 months was comparable to the local and national averages.
• 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 82%, which was comparable to the CCG average and the national average of 82%.
• 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 7 April 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 was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs. Requests for home visits were taken at any time of the day.

Updated 7 April 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 7 April 2016

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

• Of those patients diagnosed as living with dementia, 87% had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is 3% above the national average
• 76% of patients with mental health problems had an agreed care plan in place.
• 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 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 7 April 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 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.