Cranes Park Road Surgery in Sheldon, Birmingham is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to diagnostic and screening procedures, maternity and midwifery services, services for everyone, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 14th September 2017
Cranes Park Road Surgery is managed by Cranes Park Road Surgery.
Contact Details:
Address:
Cranes Park Road Surgery 25 Cranes Park Road Sheldon Birmingham B26 3SE United Kingdom
Telephone:
01217432018
Ratings:
For a guide to the ratings, click here.
Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good
Further Details:
Important Dates:
Last Inspection
2017-09-14
Last Published
2017-09-14
Local Authority:
Birmingham
Link to this page:
Inspection Reports:
Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Cranes Park Road Surgery on 25 May 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good but rated as requires improvement for providing effective services.
The full comprehensive report on the May 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Cranes Park Road Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
On 28 July 2017 we carried out a desk-based focused review to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to address the areas we identified as requiring improvement at our previous inspection on 25 May 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.
Our key findings were as follows:
The practice had implemented a logging system for prescriptions. Patient records were updated when medicines were changed, and there was a system for repeat prescriptions which included reviews of patients’ medicines.
The practice provided evidence of a programme of continuous audit. There was evidence of improved outcomes for patients, for example increased vaccinations for patients with chronic lung disease.
The practice had implemented a more comprehensive recall system for patients with long-term conditions. The practice had worked with the local Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) information technology team to make changes to the recall process.
The practice had taken action to review the process for increasing the uptake of childhood immunisations. This included reviewing patient notes where immunisations were not carried out, a detailed check of practice data, contacting parents or guardians of children not attending for their immunisations, and implementing improved data handling and sharing procedures.
Child immunisation rates had improved. The practice had vaccinated 99% of children aged up to two years compared with the national average of 91%. 83% of children aged five years had received vaccinations which was the same as the CCG average of 83%.
The practice had reviewed confidentiality in the reception area and had implemented some changes. This included providing staff training on confidentiality, providing access to a private room, introducing online appointments booking and prescription ordering, and transferring telephone calls to an office away from the reception area.
The practice is now rated as good for providing effective services.
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Cranes Park Road Surgery on 25 May 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good but rated as requires improvement for providing effective services.
The full comprehensive report on the May 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Cranes Park Road Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
On 28 July 2017 we carried out a desk-based focused review to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to address the areas we identified as requiring improvement at our previous inspection on 25 May 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.
Our key findings were as follows:
The practice had implemented a logging system for prescriptions. Patient records were updated when medicines were changed, and there was a system for repeat prescriptions which included reviews of patients’ medicines.
The practice provided evidence of a programme of continuous audit. There was evidence of improved outcomes for patients, for example increased vaccinations for patients with chronic lung disease.
The practice had implemented a more comprehensive recall system for patients with long-term conditions. The practice had worked with the local Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) information technology team to make changes to the recall process.
The practice had taken action to review the process for increasing the uptake of childhood immunisations. This included reviewing patient notes where immunisations were not carried out, a detailed check of practice data, contacting parents or guardians of children not attending for their immunisations, and implementing improved data handling and sharing procedures.
Child immunisation rates had improved. The practice had vaccinated 99% of children aged up to two years compared with the national average of 91%. 83% of children aged five years had received vaccinations which was the same as the CCG average of 83%.
The practice had reviewed confidentiality in the reception area and had implemented some changes. This included providing staff training on confidentiality, providing access to a private room, introducing online appointments booking and prescription ordering, and transferring telephone calls to an office away from the reception area.
The practice is now rated as good for providing effective services.
©2019 Care Services, all rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without permission of the copyright holders.
