You are here

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Updated 28 July 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Oxford Online Pharmacy on 24 January 2017. We found the service was not providing Safe, Effective and Well-led services in accordance with the relevant regulations. However, we found they were providing Caring and Responsive services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Following the 24 January 2017 inspection, we served two warning notices to the provider on the 20 February 2017 under Section 29 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 which required the provider to become compliant by 3 April 2017.The full comprehensive report on the 24 January 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Frosts Pharmacy Ltd on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

When we inspected the service in January 2017, we found that the provider had not updated their registration with regards to the address of the location where they were providing the regulated activities. The provider has since taken action to update the details of their registration and this has now been completed.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 12 June 2017 to confirm that the provider had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection in January 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Our key findings were:

  • The provider had introduced a system to record, assess and manage significant events and incidents.
  • Prescribing decisions were documented and made appropriately, based on medical history and made in line with risk assessed national guidance and best practice.
  • The provider had introduced a new system to check patients’ identity and ensured that the system was consistently applied.
  • Systems to manage and treat medical conditions had been reviewed and improved.
  • Systems had been introduced to assist patients in the event of a medical emergency during consultation.
  • Consent to care and treatment was sought in line with legislation and guidance and recorded.
  • All staff had received training relating to the Mental Capacity Act 2005, health and safety and fire training.
  • The provider had reviewed its systems and processes in relation to recruitment checks to ensure this was in line with legislation.
  • Systems and processes had been introduced to ensure the effective governance of the service.

  • The provider had ensured regular team meetings and clinical meetings were held and minutes from those meetings were documented and made available to all staff.
  • Learning from complaints and feedback were shared with all staff.

We found the provider had taken actions to make improvements and were now providing safe, effective and well-led services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Updated 28 July 2017

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

  • The provider had commissioned a service which checked patients’ details against several database such as the electoral roll and credit reference agencies. If patients failed this part of the identity check, they were asked to provide photo identification and a proof of address.

  • There were enough clinicians/GPs to meet the demand of the service and appropriate recruitment checks for all staff were in place.

  • The provider had introduced systems to ensure emergency services were directed to the patient in the event of a medical emergency occurring during a consultation.

  • Prescribing was constantly monitored and all consultations were monitored for any risks.

  • The provider had improved their systems to manage and treat medical conditions. This included a final check that processes had been appropriately followed by clinicians before sending the prescription to the associated pharmacy for dispensing.

  • There were systems in place for identifying, investigating and learning from incidents relating to the safety of patients and staff members. The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour and encouraged a culture of openness and honesty.

Effective

Updated 28 July 2017

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

  • Each GP assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with relevant and current evidence based guidance and standards, for example, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) evidence based practice.

  • The service had a programme of ongoing quality improvement activity. For example, the provider had employed a quality assurance pharmacist to undertake clinical audits and to monitor quality improvement activities.

  • Systems had been introduced to ensure staff had the skills, knowledge and competence to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • Consent to care and treatment was sought in lines with legislation and guidance and clearly recorded.

Caring

Updated 28 July 2017

Responsive

Updated 28 July 2017

Well-led

Updated 28 July 2017

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

  • The overarching governance framework to support clinical governance and risk management had been reviewed and actions taken to improve the service.

  • The governance framework of the service had ensured that systems and processes were in place and were continuously monitored and improved.

  • There was a systemic approach to risks management and quality improvement.

  • Meetings were held regularly and minutes were recorded.