Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Queens Avenue Surgery, Dorchester.

Queens Avenue Surgery in Dorchester 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 20th December 2019

Queens Avenue Surgery is managed by Queens Avenue Surgery.

Contact Details:

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 2019-12-20
    Last Published 2016-07-18

Local Authority:

    Dorset

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.

15th June 2016 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Queens Avenue Surgery on 15 June 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 in the majority of areas.
  • 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.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice employed a carer support worker in order to support carers in the patient population. The carer support worker helped carers to book and chase up appointments and referrals, provided guidance, organised social events and signposted carers to other support services available. The practice had identified about 2% of the practice list as carers and was working towards identifying more carers

  • The practice had a large population of older patients and particular responsibility for 15 local nursing and residential care homes. 13.3% of the patient list were aged over 75 years. This was higher than the clinical commissioning group (CCG) average of 11.4% and significantly higher than the national average of 7.8%. In response to this challenge, the practice had employed a GP for 2½ sessions per week to provide care for patients aged over 75 years. This specialist GP visited patients in nursing and residential homes, both in response to urgent problems and also for regular reviews.

  • The leadership at the practice had responded to rising patient list size by implementing plans to increase the number of GP and nurses sessions it offered. This was funded by the practice. The impact on patients was that there were always sufficient appointments available to meet patient demand. 94% of patients were able to get an appointment to see or speak to someone the last time they tried compared to the national average of 76%.

  • The practice provided training and support for a member of staff to become a dementia champion whose role was to provide advice, support and signposting to patients experiencing dementia, and their families. The dementia champion also helped to train and advise other staff on issues relating to dementia. The impact on patients with dementia was a greater awareness amongst all staff at the practice, easier communication and earlier diagnosis and treatment as a result.

However, there were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements.

Importantly, the provider should;

Ensure a robust system for actioning Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) alerts from Public Health England. For example, searches to check for any updates on patient safety alerts or medicine alerts.


Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

9th June 2014 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Queens Avenue Surgery on 15 June 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 in the majority of areas.
  • 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.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice employed a carer support worker in order to support carers in the patient population. The carer support worker helped carers to book and chase up appointments and referrals, provided guidance, organised social events and signposted carers to other support services available. The practice had identified about 2% of the practice list as carers and was working towards identifying more carers

  • The practice had a large population of older patients and particular responsibility for 15 local nursing and residential care homes. 13.3% of the patient list were aged over 75 years. This was higher than the clinical commissioning group (CCG) average of 11.4% and significantly higher than the national average of 7.8%. In response to this challenge, the practice had employed a GP for 2½ sessions per week to provide care for patients aged over 75 years. This specialist GP visited patients in nursing and residential homes, both in response to urgent problems and also for regular reviews.

  • The leadership at the practice had responded to rising patient list size by implementing plans to increase the number of GP and nurses sessions it offered. This was funded by the practice. The impact on patients was that there were always sufficient appointments available to meet patient demand. 94% of patients were able to get an appointment to see or speak to someone the last time they tried compared to the national average of 76%.

  • The practice provided training and support for a member of staff to become a dementia champion whose role was to provide advice, support and signposting to patients experiencing dementia, and their families. The dementia champion also helped to train and advise other staff on issues relating to dementia. The impact on patients with dementia was a greater awareness amongst all staff at the practice, easier communication and earlier diagnosis and treatment as a result.

However, there were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements.

Importantly, the provider should;

Ensure a robust system for actioning Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) alerts from Public Health England. For example, searches to check for any updates on patient safety alerts or medicine alerts.


Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

 

 

Latest Additions: