We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 27 June 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the practice was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Tower Hill provides a private general practice and occupational health services.

Dr Peter Macfarlane is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Thirty-seven people provided positive feedback about the service.

Our key findings were:

• The service had systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the service had a system to learn from them and improve.
• The service 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.
• Services were provided to meet the needs of patients.
• Patient feedback for the services offered was consistently positive.
• There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should

• Review the way that patient feedback is analysed so that it provides practice specific results.

We spoke with two people who used the service, two GPs, one nurse and the receptionist. One of the GPs was also the registered manager. People told us they were pleased with their care and treatment. One person said, "it is very good and professional here." The other person told us, "the doctors here are very good. It is a very calm environment to come into."

There were systems in place to ensure people understood practices and procedures before they gave their consent, which meant people were able to make informed decisions about their care and treatment.

The three treatment areas we looked at were well maintained and clean. Staff had attended life support training and were aware of how to respond to emergencies.

There were sufficient staff present to meet the needs of people using the service. This meant people were seen promptly and could be seen by a doctor of their own gender, if they wished.

There was a complaints policy in place and people were given information about how to make a complaint.