Devon Square Surgery, Newton Abbot.Devon Square Surgery in Newton Abbot is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to diagnostic and screening procedures, family planning services, maternity and midwifery services, services for everyone, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 8th October 2015 Contact Details:
Ratings:For a guide to the ratings, click here. Further Details:Important Dates:
Local Authority:
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.
12th August 2015 - During a routine inspection
![]() Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Devon Square Surgery on Wednesday 12 August 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
We saw two areas of outstanding practice for older patients and those identified as being frail:
However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.
Importantly the provider should:
Please note that when referring to information throughout this report, for example any reference to the Quality and Outcomes Framework data, this relates to the most recent information available to the CQC at that time.
Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice
10th July 2014 - During a routine inspection
![]() Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
Devon Square surgery was inspected on Thursday 10 July 2014. This was a comprehensive inspection.
Devon Square Surgery provides primary medical services to patients living in Newton Abbot and the surrounding areas. The practice is in Newton Abbot. At the time of our inspection there were 8,520 patients registered at the practice.
There was a team of seven GPs meeting patients’ needs. Five GPs were partners, meaning they held managerial and financial responsibility for running the practice. In addition there were three registered nurses, and three health care assistants.
Patients who used the practice had access to community staff including district nurses, community psychiatric nurses, health visitors, physiotherapists, speech therapists, counsellors, podiatrists and midwives.
Our key findings were as follows:
Patients spoke very positively about the staff employed at the practice and the level of care they received. Patients told us they felt that the practice is safe. They told us that care was given to them in accordance with their wishes and opportunities were given for informed decision making. Patients told us they felt the practice was responsive to their needs. For example, patients said that an urgent appointment could always be obtained on the day they contacted the practice and they could usually see their named GP for non-urgent visits or speak to a GP by telephone. This was reflective of the information provided on the practice website and within the practice welcome pack.
Patients told us about their experiences of the practice. Responses from 10 patients we spoke to on the day, from the two comment cards left for us and within the practice’s own patient survey involving 101 patients in February 2014, were very positive. Views of external stakeholders were very positive and aligned with our findings.
There was evidence that learning from incidents, significant events and investigations took place and appropriate changes are implemented to improve the practice and patient experiences.
The practice was managed well, with a clear leadership structure in operation. The staff we spoke with spoke positively about the management within the practice and told us they felt supported in their roles. Supporting information reviewed during our inspection demonstrated the practice had appropriate systems in place that regularly monitored the safety and effectiveness of the care provided.
Recruitment, pre-employment checks, induction and appraisal processes were robust. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and further training needs had been identified and planned.
Documentation about the practice demonstrated the practice performed comparatively with all other practices within the clinical commissioning group (CCG) area.
Patients felt safe in the hands of the staff and felt confident in clinical decisions made. There were effective safeguarding procedures in place.
However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.
The provider should:
Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice
1st January 1970 - During an annual regulatory review
We reviewed the information available to us about Devon Square Surgery on 29 May 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.
|
Latest Additions:
|