Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Patel and Partner’s practice on 13 October 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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.

• 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 an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available 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.

We saw a number of areas of outstanding practice:

• The practice had been involved in a research study to develop software to identify patients with a high risk of frailty. The practice had written a business case to be involved in the operational testing of the risk study which had been funded by a charity.

• The practice team was forward thinking and part of local pilot schemes to improve outcomes for patients in the area. For example the practice was one of the ten pilot sites for the Local Care Record. They had also started worked with Age UK to better deliver  care and services to housebound patients. This involved doctors proactively offering locally provided social services from which older patients might benefit on home visits. This had a positive impact for these patients as they would be advised about social services about which they might be unaware, and would be able to access both health and social services in a single appointment.

However there were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:

• The practice had completed a risk assessment because a defibrillator was not in place. However, the practice should have a defibrillator on site.
• The practice should consider whether Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks should be repeated every three years.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice