Dr N Ulla and Partners

Updated 10 March 2016

Drs Teo and Partners is situated in March, East Cambridgeshire. The practice provides services for approximately 6122 patients. It holds a Personal Medical Services contract with Cambridgeshire and Peterborough CCG.

According to information taken from Public Health England, the patient population has a higher than average number of patients aged 55-85 years. It has a significantly higher than average number of patients aged over 85. The practice has a lower than average number of patients 1-45 years compared to the practice average across England.

The practice team consists of two male GP partners and one female GP partner, a practice manager, a deputy practice manager, a nurse practitioner, two practice nurses and two health care assistants. It also has teams of secretarial and reception staff. In addition to this, the practice employs two cleaners.

The practice is open from Monday to Friday. It offers GP and nurse appointments between 8:30am and 5.30pm. The practice also offers GP appointments between 6.30pm and 8.15pm on Mondays.

Updated 10 March 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Mercheford House Surgery on 20 January 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 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.
• 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 area where the provider should make an improvement is:

• Ensure that patients with a hearing impairment are supported to access the service effectively.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 10 March 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of people with long-term conditions. 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. Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed. Clinical audits were used to improve the outcomes for patients 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 practice implemented opportunistic recall systems to ensure that patients with long term conditions had regular reviews.

Updated 10 March 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. 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 10 March 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people. The practice had strong relationships with three local care homes. Managers at these homes were very happy with the level of care provided by the GPs, and described the relationship with the practice as extremely positive. They told us the practice were very responsive and caring, that they accommodated the individual needs of their patients, and that the practice achieved good outcomes for their residents.

The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population. It was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

Flu vaccination rates for the over 65s were 73%, which is in line with the national average. Nationally reported data showed that outcomes for patients for conditions commonly found in older people, including rheumatoid arthritis and heart failure, were above local and national averages.

Updated 10 March 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.

Practice staff carried out NHS health checks for patients between the ages of 40 and 74 years. The practice was able to refer patients to a health trainer to encourage lifestyle changes.

Updated 10 March 2016

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

86% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the national average. Furthermore, 93% of patients with serious mental health problems had an agreed care plan, which is above the national average. The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.

The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations. Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 10 March 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 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. For example, the practice regularly worked with a service to support patients with who misused alcohol.

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.