Agenda item

To follow

The Director of Commissioning, BNSSG CCG, spoke to the report (in the published pack).  The Area Director (Bristol) and the Director of Business Development, Sirona, was also present.

During the subsequent discussion the following points were made;

·       The Committee noted that GPs were independent but integral to NHS.

·       There was a resilience dashboard to understand what were the key indicators to show any issues with practices. 

·       There had been a Primary Care strategy developed.  It was agreed that this should be brought to the Committee at a later date.

·       Members raised residents’ concern that the temporary arrangements including portacabins would last more than 1 year.

·       The Committee noted that due to a low amount of residents that had asked for information and/or support with moving practices as part of the dispersals it suggested a well-managed process.

·       The Committee was advised that, regarding Bishopston, planning permission process had taken longer than envisaged, and so would be longer than 10 months; it was the intention to maintain Bishopston.

·       Increased lists as a result of housing delivery activity were discussed, and Members were advised that there were assessments for the capacity of each practice and how this related to how they operate and utilise space.  For example, Horfield was identified as needing more space to meet need, although after further analysis better use of space was identified as a solution.

·       There were ongoing meetings and partnership working with Council planning,  public health and housing teams to work in an integrated way. There was a need to gain a better understanding of how planning for new housing related to and impacted upon need and capacity.

·       Members were advised that some practices worked with a reduced number of Partners as opposed to GPs; that some new GPs did not necessarily want to be Partners; and that different practices worked on differing ratios of GPs/Partners.

·       To ensure appropriate capacity there was a need for practices to work together.

·       There was a challenge around appropriate bus routes between practices.  The Committee was advised that transport was an important consideration when assessing dispersal arrangements and decisions.

·       Part of the new community health contract involved ensuring community services could work more closely with GP practices; workforces were already working closer together.  The Committee was advised that the aim was to take as much pressure/load as possible from GP practices, and there was a strong willingness for improved partnership working.

·       Members were advised that the participation patient groups (PPG) would exist within surgeries; it was also important for full consultation and so feedback from many patients as possible was key.  There was work to improve PPG engagement; this had not happened in some parts of Bristol.

·       The Chair stated that there was a strong group at Greenway Community Practice.

·       The Chair raised concern that some patients had issues seeing the same GP on occasions.

·       There was a discussion about ‘did not attend’ rates and the related costs to practices.

·       The Committee was advised that there was not local routine monitoring of missed appointment rates. This was monitored nationally; not for smaller localities.

·       There had been communication about costs to pratices due to missed appointments.  Previous publication of these figures did not work. 

ACTION: The Sub-Committee to receive clarification as to whether personal list systems were in operation in GP practices.

RESOLVED;

That the Primary Care strategy be on the Health Scrutiny Sub-Committee work programme 2020-21.