Banbury Health Centre given 'good' rating after new inspection into Safe practice

The health centre was given a ‘requires improvement’ rating for a breach of regulation in the Safe element after a comprehensive inspection of the practice in May 2022.

Inspectors returned on May 23 this year and have given the centre a revised rating of ‘good’ for the Safe element.

In their update, published today (Monday), the inspectors said: "In May 2022, we identified that 274 patients were overdue monitoring of medicines used to manage heart disease or high blood pressure (7% of the total number of patients prescribed these medicines).

"We reviewed a sample of five patients who had been listed as not having a review and found there were not appropriate recalls, tests and reviews of these patients to ensure continued safe prescribing. We also found 63 patients listed as not having appropriate thyroid function tests for their continued prescribing of Levothyroxine (used to treat thyroid conditions).

“At this inspection we undertook a variety of clinical searches to ascertain whether patients were being monitored appropriately when prescribed repeat medicines. We found there were effective systems to prompt patients for any tests they required and to undertake full reviews of their prescribing. For example we found appropriate monitoring of patients prescribed medicines used to manage heart disease or high blood pressure.

“There were 1,138 patients coded as having a diagnosis of Hypothyroidism and of those three were listed as not having the required monitoring of their condition in the last 18 months to safely continue prescribing. When we reviewed all three patients in detail we found the practice was aware of these patients and was making efforts to recall patients for the necessary tests.”

The inspectors’ clinical search outcome identified 9 out of 27 patients prescribed Amiodarone (used help keep the heart beating normally) were not listed as having the appropriate monitoring in recent months.

"When we reviewed five of these patients in detail we found the practice was aware of any overdue tests required or whether patients had the necessary monitoring done in hospitals. This demonstrated appropriate systems for monitoring patients were in place,” the inspectors reported.

“We identified some patients who required routine prescribing reviews (which can be undertaken without the patient attending the practice in many cases), had minimal information listed on the clinical records at the time of the review. We found the prescribing reviews were appropriate when we discussed this with GPs and the practice informed us they would review how they recorded such information.

“We identified some patients with Asthma had been prescribed rescue steroids (during times where Asthma is exacerbated) and all had been assessed appropriately at the time of receiving the medicines. Most patients received appropriate follow up checks after the prescribing but some had not. For example, of 10 instances of rescue steroids being issued, there was no follow up with the patient within a week on three occasions.

"The practice was providing routine Asthma reviews to the majority of these patients. There was minimal risk of harm to these patients and the practice advised us they would review the process for follow ups after rescue steroids were issued.”