We carried out a review of the data available to us about Caversham 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 Caversham Group Practice, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an inspection of this service following our annual review of the information available to us including information provided by the practice. The practice was previously inspected on 28 January 2016 and we rated the practice as Good overall.
Because of the assurance received from our review of information we carried forward the Good ratings for the following key questions: Safe, Caring and Responsive. This inspection looked at the following key questions:
Are services Effective?
Are services Well-led?
We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:
We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.
At this inspection we found:
Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:
Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 28 January 2016. 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 an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance.
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 were generally able to make an appointment, with urgent appointments available the same day. The practice was actively monitoring the appointments system to identify where improvement could be made.
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 practice was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.
Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment. However, we found that not all staff had received recent refresher training relating to infection prevention and control.
Information about services and how to complain was available on the practice website and easy to understand. However, more information could be provided to patients regarding the complaints procedure.
There was an active patient participation group, but it had been recognised that the membership did not wholly reflect the make-up of the patient list.
The areas where the practice should make improvements are:
Continue to monitor the appointments system to identify and implement possible improvement.
Ensure that appropriate infection prevention and control training is provided to those staff for whom it is overdue.
Provide information to patients in a paper format regarding the complaints procedure, escalating complaints to the Health Service Ombudsman and the availability of advocacy services to assist.
Continue with efforts to increase the involvement of minority-background patients in the patient participation group.
Chief Inspector of General Practice