Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Parkside Medical Practice on 1 June 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

• The practice demonstrated an open and transparent approach to safety. There were robust systems in place to enable staff to report and record significant events. Learning from significant events was shared widely.
• Risks to patients were assessed and well managed. There were arrangements in place to review risks on an ongoing basis to ensure patients and staff were kept safe.
• Staff delivered care and treatment in line with evidence based guidance and local guidelines. Training had been provided for staff to ensure they had the skills and knowledge required to deliver effective care and treatment for patients.
• There was a demonstrated understanding of performance within the practice. Systems were in place to support staff in undertaking regular clinical audits. Clinical audits were relevant and showed improvements in the quality of care provided to patients.
• Feedback from patients was that they were treated with kindness, dignity and respect and were involved in decisions about their care.
• 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 proactively sought feedback from patients through the use of survey which could be completed via mobile phone. Feedback was used to make improvements in the delivery of service.
• Patients said they could generally get an urgent appointment when they needed one but that it could be difficult to get through the practice by telephone. Patients also said that it was difficult to book appointments in advance.
• There were systems in place to monitor demand for appointments and the practice continually sought to improve access for patients.
• The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. The premises were suitable for patients with a disability.
• There was a clear leadership structure which all staff were aware of. Staff told us they felt supported by the partners and management.
• The practice had developed effective working relationships with their patient participation group (PPG) and acted on their suggestions for improvement.
• There was a clear mission statement which had been co-authored by staff and patients. The mission statement was supported by clear business plans which were regularly reviewed and monitored.
• All staff had been involved in setting 12 month and five year goals for the practice which were used to develop objectives.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

• The leadership team within the practice had worked with their staff and patients (through the patient participation group) to co-author their mission statement. This contributed to a high level of engagement from staff and patients to a shared set of values which underpinned the work being done by the practice.

There were areas where the provider should make improvements:

• The provider should continue to review their appointments system to improve access to routine/pre-bookable appointments.
• Ensure all required pre-employment checks are undertaken prior to new members of staff starting or undertake a documented assessment of the risk of not doing so.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice