Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Milborne Port Surgery on 15 November 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• 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 been trained to provide them with 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
• The practice was involved in local pilot schemes to improve the outcomes for patients, this included Health Coaches, to enable patients to identify issues and manage their own health, social and emotional needs.

The area the provider should make improvement:

• The provider should ensure there is a comprehensive oversight of fire safety systems and processes at the branch surgery at Templecombe.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Patients’ privacy and dignity were maintained. We spoke with six patients who told us they felt their privacy was respected at the practice. One patient told us, “They always close the door and curtains if I’m having an examination.” Another patient said, “I’m provided with total privacy.”

Patients told us that appointments were easily made and sufficient time was allocated during consultations. One patient told us, “If you want to ask questions you can. You can take as long as you need.” Another patient said, “I have more than enough time, they never rush you.”

The surgery had effective arrangements to ensure cleanliness.

The provider had not consistently operated effective recruitment procedures to ensure staff suitability for employment prior to them starting work

The provider regularly monitored the quality of the service provided and made improvements when necessary.

In this report the name of Adrian Gaymer appears as the registered manager. They were not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Adrian Gaymer’s name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time.