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

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires Improvement

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 Dr S Hamdani on 16 November 2018, as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

• 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 were able to 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 must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

• The provider must provide care and treatment in a safe way for service users.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Improve the scope of the adult safeguarding policy.
• Formalise their approach to the monitoring and follow up of patients with mental illness who do not attend for their appointments or collect medication to be assured that these patients are safe.

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 Dr Hamdani’s practice on 17 February 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for all the population groups.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. 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 an appointment and there was continuity of care. Urgent and walk in appointments were available on the same day.
• 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.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, but were not collated in a risk log.
• The practice was equipped to treat patients and meet their needs but the building required updating to improve access.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should:

• Review arrangements for audit and risk management to include thematic review.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice