We carried out a review of the data available to us about Portsdown Group Practice on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Portsdown Group Practice, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced focused inspection at Portsdown Group Practice on 20 January 2020 to follow up on the Safe key question. At our last inspection on 4 and 5 December 2018, the practice was rated good overall but the key question of Safe was rated as requires improvement.
At our last inspection there was a breach in Regulation 12, safe care and treatment. A healthcare assistant (HCA) had worked at a branch site without another clinician present and had carried out a task outside their competency. At this inspection in January 2020, we found the provider had satisfactorily addressed these areas.
We have rated this practice as good for the key question of Safe. People were protected from avoidable harm, including abuse.
The ratings of good for the key questions of Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well led services have been carried forward from the last rated inspection.
The practice continues to be rated good overall.
We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:
The provider should make improvements:
Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.
Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Portsdown Group Practice on 4 and 5 December 2018 as part of our inspection programme.
We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service is on a combination of:
We have rated this practice as good overall.
We have rated all population groups as good with the exception of working age people, which we rated as outstanding.
The working age people population group was rated as outstanding because:
We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services because:
We rated the practice as good for providing effective, caring, responsive and well-led services because:
We saw one area of outstanding practice:
The area where the provider must make improvements are:
The areas where the provider should make improvements are:
Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.
Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced focussed desk top inspection of Cosham Park Avenue Surgery on 9 October 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our previous inspection in January 2015 had found the practice was good overall. We found that the practice required improvement in the Safe domain due to breaches of regulations relating to safe delivery of services. The practice was good for Effective, Caring and Responsive and Well Led services.
We followed up on our inspection of January 2015 to check that action had been taken to meet the minimum standards. We have not revisited Cosham Park Surgery as part of this review because they were able to demonstrate that they were meeting the standards without the need for a visit.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Portsdown Group Practice, Cosham Park Avenue Surgery 15 January 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 to older people, people with long term conditions, families, children and young people, working age people, people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health. It required improvement for providing safe services.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to Legionella.
Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned for.
Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
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.
We saw one area of outstanding practice.
The practice had a duty GP each day who answered the phones and was joined by two further GPs between 9.00am and 9:30am. The GPs triaged the calls dealing over the phone, giving general advice, booking urgent appointments or directing patients to the nurse practitioner.
However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.
Importantly, the provider must:
Ensure risk assessments related to the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) are carried out effectively and all cleaning procedures are robust enough to ensure control of infections in the practice.
The practice should :
Review the policy, recording and analysis in relation to comments and complaints.
Review disposal of sharps boxes and security of external waste bins.
Discuss clinical audits fully with relevant staff members.
Chief Inspector of General Practice