Archived: Dr A K Choudhary & Dr S R Danda Practice

Updated 8 October 2015

Dr A K Choudhary & Dr S R Danda’s practice is located in a residential area of Hull and serves the surrounding areas. There are 3,486 patients on the practice list and the majority of patients are of white British background. There are two GP partners both of which are male. There are two practice nurses and one healthcare assistant. They are supported by a practice manager, reception and administrative staff. The practice is supported by an outside organisations domestic staff on a daily basis for cleaning duties.

The practice is in a comparatively deprived area and has a higher than average number of patients with health related problems in daily life and patients in receipt of Disability Allowance.

The practice is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide the regulated activities of diagnostic and screening procedures; family planning; maternity and midwifery services; surgical procedures, and treatment of disease, disorder and injury.

The practice is open for appointments on extended hours 8.00am to 7.30pm Monday and Wednesday and on a Tuesday, Thursday and Friday from 8.00am until 6.30pm. Out of Hours services are provided through Core Care, which patients’ access via the 111 service.

The practice has a Personal Medical Service (PMS) contract and also offers enhanced services for example; childhood vaccination and immunisation scheme, minor surgery and patient participation.

Updated 8 October 2015

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr A K Choudhary & Dr S R Danda’s practice on 21 July 2015.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Urgent appointments were available the same day.
• The practice had good facilities including disabled access which included a lift to allow access to first floor consulting rooms.
• Information about services and how to complain was available. The practice sought patient views about improvements that could be made to the service, including having a patient participation group (PPG).
• The practice proactively sought to educate their patients to manage their medical conditions and improve their lifestyles by having additional in house services available. These included visiting professionals such as Age UK.
• There were systems in place to reduce risks to patient safety for example, infection control procedures.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles.
• The practice made good use of audits and had shared information from one of their audits with other practices to promote better patient outcomes.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 8 October 2015

The practice is rated good for the care of people with long-term conditions. These patients had a six monthly review with either the GP and/or the nurse to check their health and medication. Patients were encouraged to manage their conditions and were referred to health education and other in-house services when necessary, for example a dietician. The practice participated in the Proactive Care Programme. The aim of this programme was to avoid unplanned admissions for identified patients who were given same day access to the surgery to help reduce these.

Updated 8 October 2015

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. Immunisation rates were good 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. Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. We saw good examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses.

Updated 8 October 2015

The practice is rated good for the care of older people. The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population even out of hours, if necessary as well as rapid access appointments for those with enhanced needs. The practice offered home visits and usual doctor appointments to improve continuity of care. The practice had regular contact with community nurses and participated in meetings with other healthcare professionals to discuss any concerns.

Updated 8 October 2015

The practice is rated good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students). The needs of this population group had been identified and the practice had adjusted the services it offered to ensure these were accessible. For example, the practice offered extended hours on two evenings until 7.30pm for those people who could not attend during normal opening hours. The practice also offered online services as well as a full range of health promotion and screening that reflected the needs for this age group.

Updated 8 October 2015

The practice is rated good for the care of people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). All patients experiencing poor mental health had received an annual physical health check. The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of people experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia. It carried out advanced care planning for patients with dementia. The practice issues a pre-screening booklet to new patients prior to them attending their appointment to assist them and the health professional during their consultation.

Updated 8 October 2015

The practice is rated 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. It had carried out annual health checks and longer appointments were available for people with a learning disability. Staff had been trained 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.