Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Dr Vaghela & Dr Gill, Loughborough University, Loughborough.

Dr Vaghela & Dr Gill in Loughborough University, Loughborough is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to diagnostic and screening procedures, family planning services, maternity and midwifery services, services for everyone, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 28th April 2017

Dr Vaghela & Dr Gill is managed by Dr Vaghela & Dr Gill.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Dr Vaghela & Dr Gill
      University Medical Centre
      Loughborough University
      Loughborough
      LE11 3TU
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01509222061

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2017-04-28
    Last Published 2017-04-28

Local Authority:

    Leicestershire

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

2nd November 2016 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Vaghela &Dr Gill on 2 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.
  • 95% of the practice’s patients were students (including approximately two thousand international students). Many were aged 25 and under and few national GP survey forms were completed. The practice therefore conducted its own patient survey annually to obtain patient feedback and improve patient care. The responses were generally positive.
  • The practice’s website was mobile phone friendly and it planned to continually improve this to encourage use of on-line services.
  • 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.
  • Urgent appointments were made available for vulnerable patients and unwell children even where the sessions were fully booked.
  • The practice had adequate facilities and equipment.
  • 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.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

 

 

Latest Additions: