Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Hedingham Medical Centre, Sible Hedingham, Halstead.

Hedingham Medical Centre in Sible Hedingham, Halstead is a Doctors/GP and Long-term condition 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 7th September 2017

Hedingham Medical Centre is managed by Hilton House who are also responsible for 1 other location

Contact Details:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Requires Improvement
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2017-09-07
    Last Published 2017-09-07

Local Authority:

    Essex

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

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.

11th May 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Hilton House Surgery on 27 January 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement and the practice was rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective, responsive and well-led services and good for caring. We issued the provider with a requirement notice for improvement. The full comprehensive report on the January 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Hilton House Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We then carried out a further comprehensive inspection on 11 May 2017. This inspection was undertaken to re-rate the practice and to ensure that the improvements identified at the January 2016 inspection had been actioned. Overall, the practice is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows;

  • The practice had improved their system of governance and made considerable improvements since our last inspection in January 2016.

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events. Learning was being cascaded to staff.
  • The practice had undertaken risk assessments across a range of areas that protected patients and staff.
  • Medicine management was effective, including the monitoring of patients prescribed high-risk medicines.
  • Medicine and patient safety alerts were managed effectively and changes of treatment made where required.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • A staff induction system was now in place. Staff received adequate supervision and appraisal.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment. Data had generally improved since July 2016 although there was improvement still required in relation to patient satisfaction over telephone access and the opening hours of the surgery.
  • The practice had identified a high number of carers and provided them with support and guidance and an assessment of their needs.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • The practice responded to the needs of their patient population and provided services accordingly.
  • 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.
  • The governance at the practice had improved and the practice performance in the Quality and Outcomes Framework remained consistently high.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Continue to improve patient satisfaction in relation to access to the practice by phone and the opening hours of the surgery.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

27th January 2016 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Hilton House Surgery on 27 January 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement and the practice was rated as requires improvement for providing safe, effective, responsive and well-led services and good for caring. We issued the provider with a requirement notice for improvement. The full comprehensive report on the January 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Hilton House Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We then carried out a further comprehensive inspection on 11 May 2017. This inspection was undertaken to re-rate the practice and to ensure that the improvements identified at the January 2016 inspection had been actioned. Overall, the practice is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows;

  • The practice had improved their system of governance and made considerable improvements since our last inspection in January 2016.

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events. Learning was being cascaded to staff.
  • The practice had undertaken risk assessments across a range of areas that protected patients and staff.
  • Medicine management was effective, including the monitoring of patients prescribed high-risk medicines.
  • Medicine and patient safety alerts were managed effectively and changes of treatment made where required.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • A staff induction system was now in place. Staff received adequate supervision and appraisal.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment. Data had generally improved since July 2016 although there was improvement still required in relation to patient satisfaction over telephone access and the opening hours of the surgery.
  • The practice had identified a high number of carers and provided them with support and guidance and an assessment of their needs.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • The practice responded to the needs of their patient population and provided services accordingly.
  • 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.
  • The governance at the practice had improved and the practice performance in the Quality and Outcomes Framework remained consistently high.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Continue to improve patient satisfaction in relation to access to the practice by phone and the opening hours of the surgery.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

 

 

Latest Additions: