• Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Lime Tree Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

321 High Road, Leytonstone, London, E11 4JT (020) 8519 9914

Provided and run by:
Dr Liaquat Ali

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile
Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All Inspections

24 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Lime Tree Surgery on 24 August 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

20 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Lime Tree Surgery on 20 August 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

9 May 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Lime Tree Surgery on 9 May 2017. 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Data showed that practice achievement for cervical cytology, immunisations for five year olds and bowel screening was below the CCG and national averages.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • All staff had completed mandatory training in line with their role; this included safeguarding children, fire training and chaperoning.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients we spoke with 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, however results from the GP Patient Survey did not support this and were low in relation to making and obtaining an appointment.
  • 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 the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.
  • The patient participation group was active and they purchased a defibrillator for the practice from monies they raised from fundraising.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Continue to work to improve patient satisfaction with access to services including getting through to the practice by telephone and obtaining an appointment.
  • Continue to work to increase the uptake of cervical cytology, childhood immunisations and bowel screening.

Review the process for recalling patients with mental health illnesses to increase the uptake of annual reviews.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice