Archived: Dr Thompson and Partners Also known as Strand Medical Group

Updated 3 April 2017

Dr Thompson and Partners (also known as Strand Medical Group) is situated on The Strand in Goring-by-Sea, West Sussex. The practice provides services for approximately 13,800 patients living within the sea side town of Goring-by-Sea and the surrounding area. The practice holds a General Medical Services (GMS). (A GMS contract is one between the practice and NHS England and the practice where elements of the contract such as opening times are standard). The practice has relatively large numbers of people aged 65 and older compared to the national average. Deprivation amongst children and older people is below average when compared to the population nationally.

As well as a team of four GP partners and one salaried GP (four male and one female), the practice also employs two GP registrars, a head of nursing, a nurse assessor, six practice nurses, two health care assistants and two phlebotomists. A practice business manager and a deputy practice manager are employed and there is a team of receptionists, medical secretaries and administrative clerks. The local midwifery and health visitor team also offer appointments from the practice.

The practice is a training practice for GP trainees and foundation level two doctors and pre-registration student nurses.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm on weekdays and appointments are available throughout these times. There are phone appointments available with GPs throughout the day according to patient need. Extended hours appointments are available between 7am and 8am and from 6.30pm to 7.30pm from Monday to Friday. Routine appointments are bookable up to three weeks in advance. Patients are able to book appointments by phone, online or in person.

Patients are provided with information on how to access the duty GP or the out of hours service by calling the practice or by referring to its website.

The practice is registered to provide the regulated activities of diagnostic and screening procedures; treatment of disease, disorder and injury; maternity and midwifery services; family planning; and surgical procedures.

Updated 3 April 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

The practice is rated good overall and good for providing safe services.

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this practice on 31 May 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good. However, a breach of legal requirements was found during that inspection within the safe domain. After the comprehensive inspection, the practice sent us an action plan detailing what they would do to meet the legal requirements. We conducted a focused inspection on 22 February 2017 to check that the provider had followed their action plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

During our previous inspection on 31 May 2016 we found the following area where the practice must improve:

• Ensure the safe storage of vaccines.

Our previous report also highlighted the following areas where the practice should improve:

• Continue to improve exception reporting figures.

• Continue to improve patient satisfaction with accessing the practice by phone and with practice opening hours.

• Continue to improve the patient satisfaction with helpfulness of the reception team.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

During the inspection on 22 February 2017 we found:

• Arrangements were in place for the safe storage of vaccines.

We also found the following in relation to the areas where the practice should improve:

• The practice was taking steps to improve the exception reporting. There was now a dedicated phone line for patients to call to book their annual review and patients received a reminder call from the nursing team for patients who did not attend. Data to show the progress made since our last inspection was not yet available.

• The practice was taking steps to improve their satisfaction scores on helpfulness of the reception team. All reception staff had received training on managing challenging conversations.

• The practice had a comprehensive action plan to increase patients’ access to the practice by phone and to appointments. There was a new phone system in place and improvements to procedures for making appointments.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 18 August 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.

• Performance for diabetes related indicators was in line with the clinical commissioning group (CCG) and national averages. For example, patients with diabetes who had a blood pressure reading in the preceding 12 months of 140/80mmHg or less was 83% compared to the CCG average of 83% and the national average of 78%.

• The practice offered diabetic foot checks at home for patients who were unable to attend the practice.

• The practice offered nurse led ‘one stop’ chronic disease clinics when patients with co-morbidities could attend for a full review to prevent them from having to attend a separate appointment for each condition.

• 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 18 August 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 practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was 90%, which was better than the CCG average of 83% and the national average of 82%.

• A full family planning service was available.

• 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 and this service was available from the practice for the convenience of patients.

• Patients were routinely screened for post-natal depression as part of their post-natal check.

Updated 18 August 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.

• A practice nurse was employed to visit older patients at home to assess and treat acute medical problems.

• The practice offered health assessments and annual reviews at home for older people who were unable to attend the practice.

• Meetings with other health and social care professionals from the community took place on a regular basis to develop care plans for older patients with complex health needs in order to prevent avoidable, unplanned hospital admission.

Updated 18 August 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.

• The practice promoted different aspects of health promotion on its notice boards in the waiting room including smoking cessation, cancer and stroke.

Updated 18 August 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 had their care reviewed in a face to face meeting in the last 12 months, which is comparable to the clinical commissioning average of 82% and the national average of 84%.

• 94% of their patients with severe and enduring mental health problems had a comprehensive care plan documented in their records within the last 12 months which was better than the CCG average of 90% and the national average of 88%.

• 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.

• An on-site counselling service was available to which patients could self-refer.

• 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 18 August 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 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.