Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Burvill House Surgery 0n 3 March 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.

• The practice offered a daily triage service by a duty GP which enabled them to direct patients to the most appropriate member of the healthcare team for their care and treatment. This system allowed the practice to manage the volume of patients seeking appointments most effectively and safely on a daily basis.

• 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 areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Commission the recently acquired defibrillator.

• Continue to monitor the changes made to the appointment system to ensure patients access to services is improved.

• Continue to engage its patients so a Patient Participation Group is active in the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

During our inspection we spoke with eight patients face to face and one by phone. We spoke with six members of staff.

When patients received care or treatment they were asked for their consent and their wishes were listened to. One patient told us: "Yes I give consent because they have explained why". We found that when minor surgery had been carried out written consent had been requested from patients before the surgery had commenced.

We saw that patients' views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided. The patients we spoke with said they were satisfied with their care. A patient told us: "The doctors are amazing. I couldn't fault any of them". Patients received their medicines when they needed them.

Staff had received training in safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. They were aware of the appropriate agencies to refer safeguarding concerns to. This ensured that patients were protected from harm.

We found that staff had received appropriate training for the roles they carried out. They were also monitored by their line manager and had regular appraisals. This indicated staff had been appropriately assessed regarding their competency.

The provider had a system in place for monitoring the quality of service provision. They regularly obtained opinions from patients about the standards of the services they received. This meant that on-going improvements could be made by practice staff.