Agenda item

The Chairman invited Dr. Howard Mulkis from Dr. Isaacson & Partners to the table.

Dr. Mulkis introduced the report which contained the business proposal for the closure of the branch surgery in East Finchley.  The Committee noted that the rationale for closure included:

·         The premises of the East Finchley site were not equipped to the same standards as the main surgery

·         The premises were not up to Care Quality Commission standards

·         The premises were not compliant with the Disability Act 2010 and do not provide ease of access for wheelchair users.

The Committee noted that the lease on the premises was due to expire and that the building was not suitable for modernisation to the current surgery standards.

A Member commented that the proposed branch closure would adversely affect residents in his ward.  The Member noted that there would be difficulties in meeting the high rental prices in the area, but suggested looking at other locations in East Finchley.  The Member noted the benefits of moving to one location, but commented that he did not feel that the move would benefit residents in East Finchley who are unlikely to travel to Muswell Hill for a drop in centre

A Member commented that a large proportion of patients at the branch were currently within walking distance of the surgery and that the route was well served by local buses and had good parking.  The Member noted the benefits of moving to one location, but commented that he did not feel that the move would necessarily benefit those in East Finchley. 

Members of the Committee commented that the branch surgery is currently offering a walk in service which the patients commented that they really liked. A Member of the Committee suggested that should NHS England decide to agree to the closure of the branch, the main surgery should offer a mix of booked appointments and walk in appointments. 

Dr. Mulkis advised the Committee that it was inefficient to be running surgeries from two sites and that operating out of one site would mean that there would be a nurse on duty each day, as well as a full complement of Doctors on site.  Dr. Mulkis advised that all patients would be able to move to the new site if they wished to. 

A Member commented that the business case could bring a benefit to all residents and noted that the business case included plans for integrated care, which would respond to the emerging needs that would be seen across the organisation.  Dr. Mulkis advised that the format of the proposed model had been suggested by NHS England and that he expected to see more “hub and spoke” models in the future. 

Responding to a question from a Member, Dr. Mulkis advised that the current situation of working out of two sites was a waste of resources. 

A Member expressed concern that should the proposed business case go ahead there would be extra pressure on A&E services due to the loss of the walk in service at the East Finchley Site.

Responding to a question from a Member, Dr. Mulkis informed the Committee that the practices had informally spoken to local practices in East Finchley to ensure that they had capacity.

A Member noted that Barnet had an ageing population and asked whether Doctors would still visit patients in their own homes, if the business case went ahead, and also if this was a regular occurrence for the surgery at the present time.  Dr. Mulkis informed the Committee that home visits currently existed and would continue should the business case for closure be approved.  Responding to a question from a Member, Dr. Mulkis advised the Committee that it was possible that existing patients who could not attend the new surgery may be able to be visited by Doctors at home. 

Responding to a question from a Member, Dr. Mulkis advised the Committee that the surgery would hope to trial extended consulting times. 

A Member of the Committee warned against offering a service that worked for the providers, as opposed to the patients and commented that the East Finchley area needed a walk-in service. 

A Member commented that there were some types of patients for whom continuity was part of the care package and questioned if some patients would find it more difficult than others in adjusting. Dr. Mulkis commented that the surgery currently saw patients from care homes and that this would continue. 

The Committee noted that some sheltered housing would be within the surgery’s vicinity should the business case be approved.  

RESOLVED that the Committee note the report and request that the draft minute extract be provided to Dr Isaacson & Partners.