This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection 9 June 2015 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires Improvement

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students) – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Woodbridge Practice on 15 March 2018 and a further visit on 21 March 2018. The reason for the inspection was as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

• The practice had a number of systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes, although more formalised processes were needed.

• The practice was open and transparent, and had systems in place to adhere to the Duty of Candour.

• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence-based guidelines.

• The practice displayed a commitment to multidisciplinary working and could evidence how this positively impacted on individual patient care.

• Discussion with staff and feedback from patients showed that staff were motivated to deliver care that was respectful, kind and caring.

• The practice organised and delivered their services to meet the needs of their patient population.They were proactive in understanding the needs of the different patient groups.

• A care coordinator was available on a full time basis within the practice. (A care coordinator provides additional support to patients to enable them to remain at home, support included arranging for equipment should it be needed).

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

• The provider must establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Review the follow up on actions from the fire risk assessment and to determine roles and responsibilities within the shared building.

• Review and clearly establish the accountability for maintenance and servicing within the building.

• Review the accessability of emergency drugs

• Review the process for the completion of the appraisal system to include all non-clinical staff and to make sure their training is up to date.

• Review the process for identifying sepsis.

• Review how medication is being stored in line with national policies.

• Review the management of blank prescription pads.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Woodbridge Practice on 9 June 2015.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically we found the practice to be good for providing well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for the six population groups. It required improvement for providing safe services.

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

• Where incidents had been identified relating to safety, staff had been made aware of the outcome and action taken where appropriate to keep patients and staff safe. However improvements need to be made as lessons learned from significant events were not always communicated to all staff and there was limited information regarding actions plans, named staff responsible for implementation and dates for completion available.
• The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity, but the majority of these were over five years old and had not been reviewed.
• Patients received care according to professional best practice clinical guidelines. The practice had regular information updates, which informed staff about new guidance to ensure they were up to date with best practice.
• Urgent appointments were available on the day they were requested. However patients said that they sometimes had to wait a long time for non-urgent appointments.
• Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• The service was responsive and ensured patients received, individual care, whilst respecting their needs and wishes. They had worked hard to recruit staff to improve accessibility and continuity of care to the practice population.
• The service was well led and there were positive working relationships between staff and other healthcare professionals involved in the delivery of service.

However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

In addition the provider should:

• Ensure the infection control policy and audit procedure is improved
• Ensure all staff have appropriate policies, procedures and guidance to carry out their role.
• Ensure all staff have access to mandatory training, and regular appraisals and records of these are kept in good order.
• Ensure the recording and reviewing of significant events is improved.
• Ensure there are detailed records kept of all practice meetings held.
• Ensure there is a process in place to regularly review and observe the competency of staff undertaking procedures.
• Improve access to non-urgent appointments for patients.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice