The Partners Also known as Newton Drive Health Centre

Updated 3 October 2016

The Partners is based in Blackpool, Lancashire. The practice is part of Blackpool Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and delivers services under a Generall Medical Services contract with NHS England.

The practice is located on the ground and first floor of Newton Drive Health Centre on the outskirts of the town. There is easy access to the building and disabled facilities are provided. There is a car park and disabled parking places. There are five GP partners working at the practice, two male and three female. The practice also employs a salaried GP. The practice is a training practice for medical students. There are two female practice nurses and nurse practitioner, two health care assistants and a practice pharmacist. There is a practice manager and a team of administrative and reception staff.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm, Monday to Friday. Extended hours are available until 8 pm on Tuesday evenings.

When the practice is closed, patients are able to access out of hours services offered locally by the provider Fylde Coast Medical Services by telephoning 111.

There are 8300 patients on the practice list. The majority of patients are white British. The largest population group (21% of patients) within the practice are aged under 18 years. All population group age profiles are generally comparable to national averages.

Information published by Public Health England rates the level of deprivation within the practice population group as two on a scale of one to ten. Level one represents the highest levels of deprivation and level ten the lowest.    

Updated 3 October 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Partners (also known as Newton Drive Health Centre) on 5 August 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 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.
• The practice had been awarded a “GP practice of the year” certificate by the local carers centre for its work supporting carers and their families.
• 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 improvement are:

• Strengthen processes to ensure that GPs see all pieces of clinical correspondence or that robust guidance is produced for administrative staff to follow.

• A risk assessment of the decision to offer less than annual Basic Life Support training to non clinical staff should be documented.

• Consider and document recruitment checks for previous trainee GP's who were now employed by the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 3 October 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.

• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.

• Performance for diabetes related indicators was similar to the national average. For example, blood measurements for diabetic patients showed that 77% of patients had well controlled blood sugar levels compared with the CCG average of 83% and national average of 78%. The percentage of diabetic patients who had received an influenza immunisation was 95% compared to the CCG average of 96% and national average of 94%. The percentage of diabetic patients with a record of a foot examination was 92% compared to the CCG average of 94% and national average of 89%. Patients were offered an insulin initiation service which meant that only the most complex patients needed to be referred to the hospital services for diabetic patients.

• 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 3 October 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 75%, which was lower than the CCG average of 82% and the national average of 82%.

• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies. A daily triage service was implemented and any urgent query relating to a child was automatically assessed by a doctor.

• We saw positive examples of joint working with midwives, health visitors and school nurses. Midwife appointments were available in-house alongside the Star Buddies service which offered help to new and expectant mothers.A Pregnancy Advisory Service was also based at the practice.

• Following feedback from a patient the practice implemented a system whereby the administration team contacted new mothers to offer post-natal, contraceptive and 8 week development check services or appointments.

• A regular family planning clinic was run by the nurse practitioner.

Updated 3 October 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of older people.

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

• The practice offered proactive, personalised care to meet the needs of the older people in its population.All patients over the age of 75 had a named GP. The practice was in the process of implementing a system to invite all patients aged over 75, not already on a chronic disease register, for a health check.

• The practice was responsive to the needs of older people, and offered home visits and urgent appointments for those with enhanced needs.

• Older patients at risk of hospital admission and in vulnerable circumstances had care plans.

• The practice maintained a palliative care register and held six weekly meetings attended by a multidisciplinary team to enable sharing of information relating to patients to improve palliative and end of life care

Updated 3 October 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 reflected the needs for this age group.

• Extended hours surgeries were offered until 8pm every Tuesday for working patients who could not attend during normal opening hours. Telephone consultations were also available.

Updated 3 October 2016

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

• Performance for mental health related indicators was similar to the national average. For example, 93% of people experiencing poor mental health had a comprehensive, agreed care plan documented in the record compared to the CCG average of 93% and the national average of 88%. The percentage of patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses whose alcohol consumption has been recorded in the preceding 12 months was 96% compared to the CCG average of 92% and the national average of 90%. Also, 76% of patients diagnosed with dementia had their care reviewed in a face to face review, compared to the CCG average of 86% and 84% nationally.

• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management of patients 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.

• 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 practice considered the needs of patients with anxiety disorders and would offer appointments at the beginning of the day when the practice was quieter.

Updated 3 October 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.

• Carers were identified and referred to the practice Carers Champion to signpost appropriate support services.

A substance misuse support service and citizens advice attended the surgery each week. These services could be accessed by anyone in the local area and was not restricted to patients of the practice.