Archived: Dr Pasquali & Partners

Updated 5 February 2015

Dr Pasquali & Partners provide a range of primary medical services for people of Little Irchester in Northamptonshire. The practice serves a population of 4300. This is a rural practice and the population is predominantly white British.

Clinical staff at this practice include one GP partner and three other GPs, two nurses and one health care assistant. The team is supported by a practice manager, and three reception staff. A health visitor midwife and district nurses also work with the practice.

The practice service for out of hours care is through the NHS 111 service.

Updated 5 February 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced inspection of Dr Pasquali & Partners on 8 October 2014. This was a comprehensive inspection. 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.

Our key findings were as follows:

• Patients were satisfied with the service and felt they were treated with dignity, care and respect and involved in their care.
• There was a good understanding of the needs of the practice population and services were offered to meet these.
• Systems were in place to identify and respond to concerns about the safeguarding of adults and children. All staff demonstrated a good awareness of the processes.
• Systems were in place to maintain the appropriate standards of cleanliness and protect people from the risks of infection. The practice was clean.

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

The provider should:

• Ensure that all staff receive training in the Mental Capacity Act (2005)
• Improve the telephone system so access to appointments can be made easier
• Improve their record keeping so results of complaint investigations and outcomes from it are readily evident.
• Take action to provide management arrangements and strengthen systems for governance and monitoring

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 5 February 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people with long term conditions.  Emergency processes were in place and referrals made for patients in this group that had a sudden deterioration in health. When needed longer appointments and home visits were available. All these patients had a named GP and structured annual reviews to check 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 5 February 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of families, children and young people. Systems were in place for identifying and following-up children living in disadvantaged circumstances and who were at risk. Immunisation rates were relatively high for all standard childhood immunisations. Patients told us and we saw evidence that children and young people were treated in an age appropriate way and recognised as individuals. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. We were provided with good examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.  Emergency processes were in place and referrals made for children and pregnant women who had a sudden deterioration in health.

Updated 5 February 2015

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.  Nationally reported data showed the practice had good outcomes for conditions commonly found amongst 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 care and in end of life care. The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, including offering home visits and rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs and home visits.

Updated 5 February 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group 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 offer continuity of care. The practice was proactive in offering a full range of health promotion and screening which reflects the needs for this age group.

Updated 5 February 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people experiencing poor mental health. 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 in place advance care planning for patients with dementia. 

The practice had sign-posted patients experiencing poor mental health to various support. The practice had a system in place to follow up on patients who had attended accident and emergency where there may have been mental health needs. Staff had received training on how to care for people with mental health needs and dementia.

Updated 5 February 2015

The practice is rated as good for the population group of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The practice offered primary care services to patients living in vulnerable circumstances including homeless people, travellers and those with learning disabilities. The practice had carried out annual health checks for people with learning disabilities and the majority of these patients had received a follow-up. The practice offered longer appointments for people with learning disabilities.

The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of vulnerable people. The practice had sign-posted vulnerable patients to various support groups and third sector 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 and out of hours.