Archived: Rosevilla Surgery

Updated 10 June 2016

Dr PC Patel and Partners is also known as Rosevilla Surgery, is located in Pitsea, Basildon. Rosevilla Surgery has approximately 4082 patients. There is limited parking available to patients at the surgery and time restricted public parking nearby. Patients may attend Southview Park Surgery for consultations and treatments.

There are two partners, one of whom is the lead GP. They employ four permanent locum GPs who work designated days each week. Overall there are three male GPs and two female GPs supported by a practice nurse and two healthcare assistants. Their non-clinical team (receptionist, administrator medical secretaries and cleaner) consists of eight members of staff and includes their practice manager.

The practice is open between 8am and 6.30pm Monday to Friday. Appointments are from 8.30am to 12.30pm and 3pm to 6pm. The practice nurses have appointments available between 9am to 12.30pm and 1.30pm to 5.30pm. The healthcare assistances are available between 9.30am to 12.30pm and 3pm to 6pm. The practice does not operate extended hours. In addition to pre-bookable appointments that could be booked up to four weeks in advance, urgent appointments are also available for people that needed them. Telephone consultations are offered daily.

The practice serves a deprived community. Both male and female patients have a lower life expectancy than the local and national averages.

The practice has a clear and comprehensive website providing patients with a menu of options that includes how they contact the surgery, access to additional health services and information sites.

Updated 10 June 2016

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr PC Patel and Partner on 4 May 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• Staff had confidence in reporting, recording, investigating and responding to significant events.
• Staff had received appropriate safeguarding training to undertake their roles and responsibilities.
• The practice was visibly clean and tidy and they had an appointed infection prevention control lead. Staff had received appropriate training and cleaning schedules were maintained.
• Appropriate recruitment checks had been undertaken for staff prior to employment.
• There were adequate arrangements in place to respond to emergencies and major incidents. Emergency medicines and equipment were available and continuity plans in place to minimise disruption to the service.
• The practice used the information collected for the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) and performance against national screening programmes to monitor outcomes for patients. The practice achieved 92% of the points available and was not an outlier for any clinical data. Clinical audits had been conducted and demonstrated quality improvement.
• Staff had undertaken a comprehensive induction and assessments during their probationary period and received appropriate training and supervision
• Patients and staff told us of the compassion shown by the clinical team and how the practice manager had comforted patients visibly distressed.
• The practice management were passionate about the practice and their plans to provide a more responsive service with the extensive planned development of their premises.
• The partners were visible within the practice and actively involved in all aspects of service delivery with partners leading on clinical care and administration. They actively sought feedback from staff and patients, listened to it and considered it within the development of the practice.

However there were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements;

• Improve the timely and comprehensive documenting of significant incidents, including reviewing the actions implemented as a result of areas of improvement having been identified through analysis.
• Identify and follow up on children who fail to attend hospital appointments to check there are no safeguarding concerns.
• Discuss changes to national guidelines during their clinical meetings.
• Record all complaints to enable the identification of themes and trends.
• Improve the identification of carers and provide them with appropriate support.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Updated 10 June 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 were invited for regular checks and blood tests relevant to their condition. Rescue COPD packs were available for patients to assist them to self-manage their conditions.
• Patients at risk of hospital admission were identified as a priority.
• Longer appointments and home visits were available when needed.
• Palliative care patients received individualised care plans and were provided with direct contact details for the GP (including out of hours).
• Performance for diabetes related indicators were comparable with the national average. For example, Patients on the diabetic register who had the influenza immunisation was similar to the national average, achieving 93% in comparison with the national average of 94%.

Updated 10 June 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. However, we found the practice were not consistently following up on children who had failed to attend hospital appointments to check there were no safeguarding concerns.
• Immunisation rates were high for all standard childhood immunisations.
• On the day urgent appointments were available for children.
• Appointments were available outside of school hours and the premises were suitable for children and babies.
• The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme for 25- 64year old women was 81%, which was comparable with the national average of 82%.
• We saw positive examples of multidisciplinary working with the community midwife attending the surgery.
• Confidential family planning and sexual health advice was available for all young people.

Updated 10 June 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. This was achieved in partnership with health and social care services such as through the community care coordinator.
• Quarterly multidisciplinary meetings were held and patients with complex needs were reviewed and their care coordinated.
• Home visits were available for housebound patients or those clinically unwell to attend the surgery.
• Dosette boxes were arranged by the practice to support patients to manage their medicines.
• Vaccinations (shingles, pneumovax and flu) were available.
• Patients were invited for senior health checks.

Updated 10 June 2016

The practice is rated as good for the care of working-age people (including those recently retired and students).

• The practice acknowledged individual patient needs and would facilitate them for appointments where possible.
• The practice offered online appointments and repeat prescription services.
• A full range of health promotion and screening was available for this age group.
• Working patients were invited to attend for health screening.

Updated 10 June 2016

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

• Appointments were arranged to best facilitate an individual’s needs and minimise anxiety.
• The practice regularly worked with multi-disciplinary teams in the case management (including care reviews) of patients experiencing poor mental health, including those with dementia.
• The practice achieved above the national average for their management of patients with poor mental health. For example, 88% of their patients with schizophrenia, bipolar affective disorder and other psychoses had a comprehensive care plan documented in their records within the last 12 months and 95% had their alcohol consumption recorded.
• The practice encouraged and support patience for dementia screening and conducted advance care planning for patients. However they had slightly lower than the national average for the percentages of their patients diagnosed with dementia receiving a face to face review within the preceding 12 months. They achieved 78% in comparison with the national average of 84%.
• The practice had told patients experiencing poor mental health about how to access various support groups and voluntary organisations. The practice worked with crisis teams to fast track patients to A&E.
• Staff had a good understanding of how to support patients with mental health needs and dementia. Staff were encouraged and had undertaken dementia awareness training.

Updated 10 June 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. Patients with no fixed abode were permitted to register under the practice address.
• 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. For example, patients who abused substances or who were subject to domestic abuse.
• 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.