Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence table for further information.

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating August 2016 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park Surgery on 25 May 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

• Staff treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
• Patient satisfaction and feedback from patients was consistently positive.
• The practice was responsive to the needs of it patients. It tailored and developed services to meet their needs.
• The practice provided a personalised service. The GPs had personal lists which provided consistency of care for patients and their families.
• Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they could access care when they needed it.
• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation
• The practice had systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.

However,

• The practice did not always have reliable systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines

The areas where the provider must make improvements are: -

• Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients

The areas where the provider should make improvements are: -

• Improve performance against the quality and outcomes framework indicators for mental health and chronic lung disease.
• Look at ways to improve uptake for cervical screening.

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 Park Surgery on 23 August 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.

• Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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.

• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

• Keep higher than average exception reporting rates for mental health indicators in the quality and outcomes framework under review and ensure action is taken to reduce rates where clinically appropriate.

• Set up a patient participation group so that patients and carers can share their views and experiences with the practice and influence the development and improvement of the services the practice provides.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We spoke with seven patients who used the service who had attended on the day of inspection for an appointment. The receptionists handed out slips to patients asking them if they would be prepared to speak with us. We spoke with one patient on the day and telephoned the others. We sat in on one patient consultation with their general practitioner (GP).

We also spoke with the health visitor who was attached to the practice. She told us the surgery was very good at communicating with her. We spoke with the chair of the patient support group who described the groups fundraising efforts.

We spoke with staff that included; the practice manager, deputy manager, head receptionist, nurse practitioner and two GPs. We reviewed patient records and the practice’s policies and procedures.

Patient’s spoken with told us they were very happy with the care at the surgery. One patient told us that “They are absolutely brilliant there”. Another patient told us “They are top notch”. None of the patients had made a complaint but told us they felt it would be dealt with if they did have to complain. They said it was not difficult usually to get an appointment with the doctor. We were told that sometimes there was a wait of 5- 10 minutes but they also told us they did not mind that.

We saw that patients were treated with respect and had treatment options discussed with them, and that there were effective infection control measures in place to prevent the spread of infection.

We looked at the processes that the practice had in place to ensure that patients who used the service were protected from abuse. These processes ensured staff had an understanding of adult and child abuse and what to do if it was suspected.

We looked at the systems and processes the practice had in place to review the quality of the service provided. These processes ensured information provided was used to improve the service provided.

We saw that there were effective processes in place to ensure complaints were dealt with appropriately.