Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced inspection visit on 10th December 2014. The overall rating for the practice is good. We found the practice was good in providing: safe, responsive and effective care for all of the population groups it serves.

Our key findings were as follows:

• Where incidents had been identified relating to safety, staff had been made aware of the outcome and action was taken where appropriate, to keep people safe.

• All areas of the practice were visibly clean and where issues had been identified relating to infection control, action had been taken.

• Patients received care according to professional best practice clinical guidelines. The practice had regular information updates, which informed staff about new guidance to ensure they were up to date with best practice.

• The service ensured patients received accessible, individual care, whilst respecting their needs and wishes.

• We found there were positive working relationships between staff and other healthcare professionals involved in the delivery of service.

We saw several areas of outstanding practice including:

All patients, but particularly those who work, could access appointments during early mornings in the week and Saturday morning openings throughout the year. Patients could also access the GP for telephone advice if attending the practice was difficult.

• Appointment length was need-specific so GPs arranged longer appointments when they thought this was necessary. Longer appointments were routinely offered to some patients, for example for those patients who have a learning disability.
• The practice actively supported patients who may be vulnerable, including patients with alcohol or substance misuse and those with chronic neurological problems based in a local care home.
• The practice used the ‘choose and book’ system effectively by ensuring all patients had a referral made before they left the surgery on the day of their appointment.

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

• Events and Incidents were reviewed by the GPs and discussed at their meetings. However,the systems in place did not apply what was learnt from the event to other aspects of the practice to ensure that risks were minimised and incidents did not happen again.
• The practice did not have team meetings. This limited the opportunities for staff to contribute to the development of the practice and ensure that lessons from incidents are effectively communicated.
• The practice did not have a Pateint Participation Group which limited the opportunities for patients involvement in decision making for the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice