Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Sandford Surgery, Sandford, Wareham.

Sandford Surgery in Sandford, Wareham is a Doctors/GP specialising in the provision of services relating to diagnostic and screening procedures, family planning services, services for everyone, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 7th April 2020

Sandford Surgery is managed by Sandford Surgery.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Sandford Surgery
      6A Tyneham Close
      Sandford
      Wareham
      BH20 7BQ
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01929554490

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

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

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2020-04-07
    Last Published 2019-04-26

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.

20th February 2019 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Sandford Surgery on 20 February 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 requires improvement overall and good for all population groups.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services because:

  • There were no overarching health and safety risk assessments or systems to mitigate risk as far as practically possible within the practice. In particular, fire safety and safety of gas and electrical installations.
  • The practice was unable to fully demonstrate that staff had received training on safeguarding patients and infection control.
  • There were shortfalls in the monitoring and storage of prescription stationery.
  • Patient groups directives and patient specific directives used for administering medicines were not appropriately signed and authorised.
  • There were shortfalls in Legionella management. We found that water temperatures checks had been carried out. However, the practice could not fully demonstrate that all risks had been minimised as far as possible. Records related to water temperature checks were incomplete.
  • The practice could not demonstrate fully how significant events and alerts were acted upon and how learning was effectively shared with relevant members of staff to drive improvement and support continuous learning.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing well-led services because:

  • The practice had a vision to support patients to lead healthy lives and to support and develop staff. The strategy had not been translated into meaningful and measurable plans at all levels of the service.
  • There were shortfalls in systems and processes in place for good governance and the practice was unable to demonstrate fully how they monitored the overall running of the practice,
  • There was limited evidence to demonstrate how systems and processes in place for using information from Quality and Outcomes framework results and exception reporting were used to improve performance.
  • Risk assessment related to health and safety in the practice were not fully effective and did not demonstrate that risk was mitigated when possible.
  • Documentation to demonstrate how the practice operated and associated policies and procedures were not effectively reviewed, relevant and easily accessible.
  • Information sharing on significant events and alerts and learning from these was not fully shared with all relevant members of staff.
  • The practice was unable to demonstrate what actions would be taken if there was an interruption to service provision. Business continuity plans relied on the use of a social media group app: WhatsApp, to communicate with staff members, not clear how cover was provided from other practices in the area if the premises could not be used.
  • The practice could not demonstrate when training had been provided and how development needs identified during appraisals were addressed.

We rated the practice as good for providing effective, caring and responsive services. All population groups were rated as good:

  • 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 areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

Where a service is rated as inadequate for one of the five key questions or one of the six population groups, it will be re-inspected no longer than six months after the report is published. If, after re-inspection, the service has failed to make sufficient improvement, and is still rated as inadequate for any key question or population group or overall, we will place the service into special measures. Being placed into special measures represents a decision by CQC that a service has to improve within six months to avoid CQC taking steps to cancel the provider’s registration.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

1st November 2016 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Sandford Surgery on 1 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.
  • However some improvements were required in areas of infection control and water safety.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and were dedicated to delivering care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained in order to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver outstanding care and effective treatment, and were proactive in providing an holistic approach to health and wellbeing and in providing opportunistic testing where appropriate.
  • 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 patient feedback and continuous learning.
  • 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 and three open surgery sessions available weekly to enable immediate and convenient treatment
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure, and although it had gone through changes recently, the staff felt greatly supported by management.

  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, and was strongly involved with the patient participation group.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
  • The practice was consistently above national averages with regards to quality markers and in line with or better than other local practices for the same markers.
  • Many patients cited examples of where they believe the clinical staff have performed exceptional care, with an example being that palliative patients are given the GPs’ home and mobile telephone numbers so that they can access their GP at any time they may need.
  • The practice was also piloting the use of enhanced care summary notes (in conjunction with NHS England and the local ambulance trust) that could prove valuable to any health professional outside the practice that needed to know more information about the patient than they could otherwise gain from the basic patient notes, such as normal cognitive behaviour or pain management preferences.

However there were areas where the provider should make improvement:

  • Review the arrangements for the safe storage of vaccines.

  • Ensure the systems for infection and prevention control including legionella are effective.

  • Review the front door access for patients who are wheelchair users.

  • Review final response letters to complaints.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

 

 

Latest Additions: