Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Tudor Way surgery on 5 July 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 could get an appointment with a named GP, although sometimes there was difficulty getting a pre-bookable appointment. Urgent appointments were always available the same day.
• The practice had good facilities and was 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:

• Review processes in place for carrying out infection control audits at both sites ensuring that it is clear what issues relate to which site.

• Review the process for sharing and documenting lessons learnt from complaints and incidents ensuring all relevant staff are made aware.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We visited Tudor Way surgery as part of this inspection. We did not speak with people using the service due to the nature of the essential standards of quality and safety we inspected.

We found the provider had appropriate arrangements in place for the safe management of medicines and the recruitment of staff before they began work.

We visited both the Petts Wood surgery and branch surgery in Bickley as part of this inspection and spoke with people at both locations. People we spoke with had mixed views about the availability of appointments that suited them. One person told us the reception staff “put effort in for me to be seen quickly" and another person said they “usually fit me in quite quickly”. However other people told us it was difficult at times to get through to the surgery on the telephone or to get an appointment that suited them and one person described their experience when they required an emergency appointment as “a nightmare”. Almost all the people we spoke with were happy with the service provided by the GP and healthcare professionals. One person said they were "very impressed" with the minor surgery unit at the Bickley practice and other people said they received good care and treatment.

We found that people received care and treatment that met their individual needs and they were provided with information to support their treatment. The provider took steps to ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse and staff knew how to respond to allegations of abuse. The provider also monitored the quality of the service that people received. However we found that appropriate checks were not always carried out on people employed at the service and medication was not stored safely or disposed of appropriately in all cases.