Frankley Health Centre Also known as Dr's Bhardwaj & Sinha

Updated 18 November 2016

Frankley Health Centre is a GP practice which provides primary medical services under a General Medical Services (GMS) contract to a population of approximately 4,100 patients living in Rubery and surrounding areas of South Birmingham. A GMS contract is a standard nationally agreed contract used for general medical services providers.

The practice operates from a spacious single storey building with car parking available including disabled parking spaces and a ramp allowing access to the front door. There is a bell to alert staff that patients with mobility difficulties may need assistance to open the door in the foyer.

The practice population has a higher than the national average number of patients aged 5 to 15 years, and those aged 55 to 69 years. National data indicates that the area is one that experiences significant levels of deprivation. The practice population is made up of predominantly white British with approximately 10% of patients from ethnic minority groups such as Asian, Black and Eastern European.

There are two GP partners, one male and one female and the practice have recently employed a salaried female GP for two sessions per week. The practice employ two practice nurses, a practice manager and reception manager, who are supported by a team of administrative and reception staff.

Frankley Health Centre is a teaching practice for students in the final year of training to become a doctor and which support and supervise six students per year.

The practice is open on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday between 8.30am and 6pm and Thursday from 8.30am until 12.30pm. The surgery closes for one hour between 12.30 and 1.30pm for lunch although telephone lines remain open. Extended hours appointments are provided from 6.30pm until 7.45pm on Mondays for pre-bookable appointments only. When the surgery is closed during core hours, services are provided by South Doc and the out of hours service is provided by Primecare who can be contacted via NHS 111. Core hours are between 8am and 6.30pm.

Updated 18 November 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Frankley Health Centre on 14 September 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. Staff were aware of this and lessons learnt were shared.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed. There were systems in place to address all areas of risk, although the system for the recording of actions from safety alerts required some amendment, which has subsequently been completed. 

• 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 they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Review the process they have put in place to record actions from safety alerts to ensure it is working effectively.
• Review the system for tracking prescriptions to ensure it is working effectively.
• Monitor the effectiveness of recent changes in the telephone system.
• Ensure the programme of appraisals is completed as planned.
• Continue to explore ways of establishing a patient participation group in line with contractual requirements.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 18 November 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.
• The percentage of patients with diabetes, on the register, whose last cholesterol measured in the preceding 12 months was within the recommended level was 79%. This was comparable to the Clinical Commissioning Group and national averages of 80% and 81% respectively.
• 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.
• The practice held nurse led clinics providing advice on how to reduce exacerbations of their condition.

Updated 18 November 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 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.
• The percentage of women aged 25-64 whose notes recorded that a cervical screening test has been performed in the preceding 5 years was 82% which was comparable to the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and national averages of 80% and 82% respectively.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• The practice offered a private room for breast feeding mothers and there was a sign in the waiting area to inform patients of this.
• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives and health visitors. The practice held meetings with the health visitor bi-monthly.
• The practice offered eight week postnatal checks for mothers and babies prior to immunisation.

Updated 18 November 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.
• They offered home visits from the practice nurse to carry out flu vaccinations for those patients who were housebound and could not attend the practice.
• The practice manager checked appointments daily of those elderly patients who had not attended their appointments and called the patients to rebook and ensure their welfare.
• There was a flag on the records of housebound patients to alert staff to this fact.
• Older patients were offered ‘next of kin’ consent forms to enable the practice to discuss the patient’s condition or results if the patient wished them to.
• Patients at increased risk of admission to hospital had alerts on their records to ensure staff provided same day access to a GP or nurse.

Updated 18 November 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. This included extended hours appointments for those who could not attend during normal hours.
• The practice offered well person checks as well as NHS health checks.
• 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.
• The practice was involved in the Prime Minister’s Challenge Fund which enabled access to GP and nurse appointments at a local hub until late in the evening, early morning and at weekends.

Updated 18 November 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 had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which was comparable to the local CCG and the national averages of 87% and 84% respectively.
• The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses who had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in the record, in the preceding 12 months was 88% which was comparable with the CCG and national averages of 91% and 88% respectively.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary 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.
• The Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) counsellor attended the practice weekly to offer support and counselling to patients experiencing mental health problems.

Updated 18 November 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 those with a learning disability.
• The practice offered longer appointments for patients with a learning disability.
• 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. For example, the citizen’s Advice Bureau attend the practice fortnightly.
• 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.
• Staff had received training in domestic violence.
• The practice hosted a weekly clinic for substance misuse.