Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Wenlock Road Surgery on 21 October 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good; but was requires improvement for providing well led services. The full comprehensive report on the October 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Wenlock Road Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 6 September 2017 to review in detail the actions taken by the practice to improve the quality of care.

Overall the practice is still rated as good, but now also good for providing well led services.

Our key findings were as follows:

• Action had been taken to address all of the issues identified at the previous inspection.
• The arrangements for recording and learning from significant events and verbal complaints had been strengthened.
• A more structured approach to clinical audits had been developed, to ensure they were linked to improving outcomes for patients.
• The practice had begun the process for registering the third GP partner within the practice with CQC.

At our previous inspection on 21 October 2016 we said the provider should obtain evidence of all staff’s immunity status against vaccine-preventable diseases. During this inspection we found action had been taken to obtain this information from staff’s own GP practices.

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 Wenlock Road Surgery on 21 October 2016. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

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

• Staff appeared to understand their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses the practice. However, when things went wrong, reviews and investigations were not sufficiently thorough and lessons learned were not communicated widely enough to support improvement.
• Most risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
• Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had 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.
• 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 regulation.

There were areas where the provider needs to make improvements.

The provider should:

• Review the systems and processes in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided. Specifically, to enable lessons to be learned from significant events to prevent their reoccurrence, managing verbal complaints and using clinical audit to improve service quality
• Complete the process for the registration of the partnership with the Care Quality Commission
• Obtain evidence of all staff’s immunity status against vaccine-preventable diseases such as measles.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

We saw the practice actively sought the views of patients through comments boxes and the patient participation group, and that changes to the service had been implemented as a result of the feedback.

We spent time in the practice observing how it worked and speaking to patients and staff. Patients told us they were treated with care and respect and we saw positive exchanges between patients and staff. One person said, "They found the practice to be very well run and a nice place to come." They told us their views were listened to and that it met their needs. Patients we spoke with told us they could get an appointment easily

We saw the practice was up to date with infection control policies and procedures and when we spoke with staff they had a clear understanding how to reduce the risk of cross infection. The surgery was clean and well maintained.

Staff were provided with support, guidance and training to make sure they were able to carry out their role safely and monitored their performance to maintain the standards.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. We saw that the general practitioners were following national guidance as well as local Clinical Commissioning Group guidelines to make sure they were using best practice guidance.

Staff we spoke with understood safeguarding procedures.