Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Teverson & Partners on 12 August 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed. Learning from when things went wrong was widely shared with staff through meetings and discussions. People affected by safety incidents were offered an explanation and an apology.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed. There were systems for assessing risks including risks associated with medicines, promises, equipment and infection control.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Clinical audits and reviews were carried out to make improvements to patient care and treatment.
• Staff had received training appropriate to their roles. Staff performance was appraised and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
• 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. Complaints were investigated and responded to appropriately and apologies given to patients when things went wrong or their experienced poor care or services.
• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should:

• Review the procedures for checking and auditing medicines to include those in the dispensary and include any dispensary related errors, incidents or near misses as part of the practice significant events analysis procedures.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

People were given all the information they needed to make an informed decision about their treatment, and were asked to sign consent to treatment where necessary.

Care was assessed and delivered in a way to meet the needs of people who used the service. People were positive about the treatment they received from the service. One person told us: “I have only just registered at the practice. My first impression of the GP I saw today was very good.” Another person we spoke with told us: “They’ve been very good, they always explain everything.”

Information was clearly displayed for people, including health promotion, access to support services and information about the practice and the services provided.

People told us that their treatment was clearly explained to them and they were able to ask questions and make choices about their medication. This enabled people to make informed decisions regarding their care.

During our inspection we saw from the records we looked at that appropriate staff recruitment and pre-employment checks had been carried out.

The people we spoke with were happy with the service and did not have any concerns or issues about the care and treatment they received. When any issues were raised the practice had policies and procedures in place to deal with them appropriately.