Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni, Birmingham.
Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni in 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 24th May 2017
Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni is managed by Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni.
Contact Details:
Address:
Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni 15 Rowlands Road Birmingham B26 1AT United Kingdom
Telephone:
01217066623
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
2017-05-24
Last Published
2017-05-24
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 carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni, also known as Rowlands Road Surgery on 3 August 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the August 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection was an announced follow up inspection carried out on 27 March 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the required improvements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 3 August 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.
Our key findings were as follows:
Since our comprehensive inspection, which took place in August 2016 documents we viewed as part of our follow up inspection showed that lessons from incidents were shared. The practice was able to demonstrate that actions had been taken to prevent the same thing happening again.
Previously, documents we viewed showed that some risks were not effectively managed. For example, risk associated with the building, recruitment checks and business continuity planning. During the follow up inspection we saw that risk assessments were practice specific, staff had received immunity checks and training to enable them to carry out their role safely and effectively.
When we carried out our comprehensive inspection, governance arrangements were not effectively managed. As a result, some
risks had not been identified or well managed and we saw some policies which were not practice specific. At the follow up inspection we saw that
arrangements for identifying, recording and managing risks, and implementing mitigating actions had been established
. Policies had been reviewed and were practice specific.
Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) performance during 2015/16 showed that the practice completed 75% of dementia reviews. Unverified data provided by the practice during the follow up inspection showed that this had increased to 80%. Staff we spoke with explained that this increase was due to correct recording and proactive identification of dementia patients.
Staff we spoke with during the comprehensive inspection explained that the last multidisciplinary meeting held to discuss patients with end of life care and complex needs had not taken place for over 12 months. Members of the clinical team we spoke with as part of this inspection told us that the practice ensured that end of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of different patients, including those who may be vulnerable because of their circumstances. For example, the practice attended palliative care meetings every three months; we saw evidence of a meeting which took place in March 2017.
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni, also known as Rowlands Road Surgery on 3 August 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the August 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Srinivas Rao Dasari and Dr Raveendra Katamaneni on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection was an announced follow up inspection carried out on 27 March 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the required improvements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 3 August 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.
Our key findings were as follows:
Since our comprehensive inspection, which took place in August 2016 documents we viewed as part of our follow up inspection showed that lessons from incidents were shared. The practice was able to demonstrate that actions had been taken to prevent the same thing happening again.
Previously, documents we viewed showed that some risks were not effectively managed. For example, risk associated with the building, recruitment checks and business continuity planning. During the follow up inspection we saw that risk assessments were practice specific, staff had received immunity checks and training to enable them to carry out their role safely and effectively.
When we carried out our comprehensive inspection, governance arrangements were not effectively managed. As a result, some
risks had not been identified or well managed and we saw some policies which were not practice specific. At the follow up inspection we saw that
arrangements for identifying, recording and managing risks, and implementing mitigating actions had been established
. Policies had been reviewed and were practice specific.
Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) performance during 2015/16 showed that the practice completed 75% of dementia reviews. Unverified data provided by the practice during the follow up inspection showed that this had increased to 80%. Staff we spoke with explained that this increase was due to correct recording and proactive identification of dementia patients.
Staff we spoke with during the comprehensive inspection explained that the last multidisciplinary meeting held to discuss patients with end of life care and complex needs had not taken place for over 12 months. Members of the clinical team we spoke with as part of this inspection told us that the practice ensured that end of life care was delivered in a coordinated way which took into account the needs of different patients, including those who may be vulnerable because of their circumstances. For example, the practice attended palliative care meetings every three months; we saw evidence of a meeting which took place in March 2017.
©2019 Care Services, all rights reserved. No part of this website may be reproduced without permission of the copyright holders.
