Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Barnoldswick Medical Centre on 22nd March 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement as arrangements to monitor and improve quality and identify risks were not in place.

The full comprehensive report on the March 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Barnoldswick Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This announced comprehensive follow up inspection was undertaken on 20th July 2017. Overall the practice is now 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 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.
• The practice was above average for its satisfaction scores on consultations with GPs and nurses.
• The health and wellbeing of patients in relation to their caring responsibilities was reviewed when they attended for a consultation or health check. They were directed to the various avenues of support available to them.
• Information about the services provided 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 told us they found it easy to make an appointment with the GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• The practice facilities were well equipped to treat patients; however access was restricted due to the structure of the building.
• 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.

There were areas where the provider should make improvements:

• Develop clinical team work by holding regular clinical meetingswith the practice nurses

• Consistently obtain written consent for minor operations

• Continue to identify and provide support for patients who are also carers.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Barnoldswick Medical Centre on 22nd March 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement as arrangements to monitor and improve quality and identify risks were not in place.

The full comprehensive report on the March 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Barnoldswick Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This announced comprehensive follow up inspection was undertaken on 20th July 2017. Overall the practice is now 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 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.
• The practice was above average for its satisfaction scores on consultations with GPs and nurses.
• The health and wellbeing of patients in relation to their caring responsibilities was reviewed when they attended for a consultation or health check. They were directed to the various avenues of support available to them.
• Information about the services provided 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 told us they found it easy to make an appointment with the GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
• The practice facilities were well equipped to treat patients; however access was restricted due to the structure of the building.
• 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.

There were areas where the provider should make improvements:

• Develop clinical team work by holding regular clinical meetingswith the practice nurses

• Consistently obtain written consent for minor operations

• Continue to identify and provide support for patients who are also carers.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

During our inspection we spoke with four patients who had attended for appointments, one GP, the practice manager, a receptionist and a practice nurse. We also spoke with a patient who was a member of the Patient Participation Group (PPG).

Patients told us they were happy with the service and the treatment they received. They told us they were fully involved in discussions and decisions about their treatment and said they were listened to. One person said, "My doctor listens to me and explains the choices that are available to me".

People were generally happy with the appointments system. They told us they could request an appointment either by dropping into the practice, by booking on line or by telephoning the practice and speaking with a receptionist or a doctor.

The practice had developed policies and procedures for dealing with allegations of abuse. Records showed staff had undertaken appropriate training in safeguarding. This would help staff to recognise and act when patients were at risk of abuse or neglect.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of service provision. We found patients' views had been taken into account in the way the service was provided.