This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating October 2015 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Burnside Surgery 30 October 2018

At this inspection we found:

• The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
• Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
• Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they could access care when they needed it.
• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• The provider should develop the system for recording significant events to ensure consistency in the way they are managed.

• A more detailed risk assessment should be completed to identify a list of emergency medicines that are not suitable for a practice to stock and the reasons why these medicines are not provided.

• The practices performance on quality indicators for patients with mental health problems should be improved.

• A second cycle of clinical audit should be carried out to test the effectiveness of the service and to monitor quality and to make improvements.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence tables for further information.

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Burnside Surgery on 14 October 2015. 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 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.
• Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
• Patients said they found it easy to make routine appointments with a GP, and in an emergency they could be seen on 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 (Duty of Candour ensures that providers are open and transparent with people who use services and other relevant persons in general in relation to care and treatment).

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• The recruitment policy should be reviewed to make sure all aspects of the recruitment process are recorded.
• A system should be implemented to make sure the oxygen is in date.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice