We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Oakwood Surgery on 12 March 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

• what we found when we inspected
• information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
• information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall. We rated the population group of families, children and young people as outstanding due to the high child immunisation rates, and good for all other population groups.

We found that:

• The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
• Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
• The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
• The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

• Review the prescribing practice and competence of non-medical prescribers.
• Review the recording of patient and safety alerts received into practice to demonstrate actions and dissemination.
• Review systems for coding to ensure registers of patients are accurate and up to date.
• Review the staff training system so that the provider can ensure staff training is up to date.
• Review governance processes to enable sharing of actions and learning.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Oakwood Surgery on 27 October 2015. Overall the practice is rated as outstanding.

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

Feedback from patients was consistently positive about the care and treatment they received, and the way staff treated them. Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, dignity and respect.

Patients were able to access care and treatment when they needed it, and most people could access appointments in a way, and at a time that suited them.

The practice actively sought the views of patients and staff, which it acted on to improve the services. It had a very active patient participation group (PPG) which influenced practice development.

The practice used innovative and effective ways to improve outcomes for patients. High importance was placed on improving patients’ wellbeing by offering regular health reviews and various screening checks.

The services were tailored to meet people’s individual needs and delivered in a way to ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care. The staff team worked collaboratively with other services to meet patients’ needs, and support vulnerable individuals.

The practice had comprehensive and embedded systems in place to keep patients safe. There was a pro-active approach to anticipating and managing risks, and a focus on openness and learning when things went wrong.

The staff team continued to increase in size and skill mix to meet patients’ needs and the expansion of the services. Staff were actively supported to continually develop their knowledge and skills to ensure the delivery of high quality care.

There had been significant improvements to the services provided, since the partners took over the practice in April 2013. The practice has demonstrated outstanding leadership skills in order to achieve this. The management and governance of the practice assured the delivery of high-quality person-centred care.

The culture and leadership empowered staff to carry out lead roles and drive continuous improvements. High standards were promoted and owned by all staff.

We saw several areas of outstanding practice including:

High importance was placed on education and empowering patients to self manage their health, with a focus on long-term conditions. For example, patients with diabetes received a copy of their review form and test results prior to attending a review to enable them to be better informed and prepared. The focus of their reviews involved education and strategies to enable them to self-manage their condition and improve their health. Several people were also involved as ‘patient experts’ to obtain their views, and share their experiences and life style changes they had made with other patients and staff.

The practice was proactive in reaching out to patients who were reluctant to attend the surgery, including men. The practice ran a campaign in May 2015 promoting male health and wellbeing, which encouraged men to see a GP or nurse about any health issues, or advice on how to make lifestyle changes. An additional 160 men attended the practice between May to August 2015, compared to the same period the previous year.

The practice actively engaged with young people and used innovative approaches to gather feedback from patients, which influenced practice development. For example, the young people on the patient participation group had looked at the practice’s website as to how appropriate and useful the information was for them. Changes were made to the website in response to their feedback.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice