The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Heaton Road Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

17-19 Heaton Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE6 1SA (0191) 265 5911

Provided and run by:
Heaton Road Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Heaton Road Surgery 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 Heaton Road Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

23 and 27 September 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive at Heaton Road Surgery on 23 and 27 September 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Safe - requires improvement

Effective - good

Caring - good

Responsive - good

Well-led - good

Following our previous inspection on 10 February 2015 the practice was rated outstanding overall.

At the last inspection we rated the practice as outstanding for providing caring, responsive and well-led services because:

  • They had implemented targeted support for those patients who were high-risk, such as those who required palliative care, the house bound and care home patients.
  • They had identified and implemented improvement plans following poor staff satisfaction levels.

At this inspection, we found that those areas previously regarded as outstanding practice were now embedded throughout the majority of GP practices. While the provider had maintained this good practice, the threshold to achieve an outstanding rating had not been reached. The practice is therefore now rated good for providing caring, responsive and well-led services.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Heaton Road Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities.

  • This was a comprehensive inspection which considered whether the practice was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

How we carried out the inspection

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • The practice mostly provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care. Leaders had a clear strategic vision for the practice and understood the challenges they faced, but this wasn’t always translated into the business planning process.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services because:

  • The practice had not followed UK Health and Security Agency guidance on safe storage of medicines and maintaining records of staff immunisations.
  • The practice had not maintained an appropriate audit trail of significant events to support the practice to learn and improve.
  • There were a small percentage of patients prescribed high-risk medicines where monitoring had not been carried out in line with best practice guidance.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Maintain a full record of staff vaccination status in line with current UK Health Security Agency guidance.
  • Continue with the changes implemented following the CQC site visit to safely and effectively handle samples from patients.
  • Continue with plans to follow up the small percentage of patients prescribed high-risk medicines or with long term conditions who do not respond to review appointment invites or are hard to reach, to ensure these patients receive safe care and treatment.
  • Encourage proactive and collaborative discussions to support and protect adults and children at risk of significant harm by holding regular multidisciplinary meetings.
  • Improve the business planning and governance processes to ensure they support the practice to meet their aspirations whilst supporting effective documentation to be maintained.
  • Improve the uptake of cervical screening and childhood immunisations to support patients to maintain good health.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

10 February 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Heaton Road Surgery on 10 February 2015. Overall the practice is rated as outstanding for providing caring and responsive services and for being well-led. They are rated good for providing safe and effective services. An innovative, caring, effective, responsive and well-led service is provided that meets the needs of the population served.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. All opportunities for learning from internal and external incidents were maximised, external agencies were informed of the outcome if they were involved. There were strong comprehensive safety systems in place.
  • The practice had scored very well on clinical indicators within the quality outcomes framework (QOF). They achieved 98.4% for the year 2013/14, which was above the average in England of 96.47%. The QOF is part of the General Medical Services (GMS) contract for general practices. Practices are rewarded for the provision of quality care.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. The proportion of patients who described their overall experience of the GP surgery as good or very good in the GP National Survey was 97%, compared to the national average of 85%. Several patients we spoke with commented on the helpfulness of the staff and caring manner of the GPs and said it was the best practice they had ever been registered at.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. Patients commented how helpful the staff were in trying really hard to get them a convenient appointment. This was reflected in the data from the national GP survey. 91.5% of patients reported a good overall experience of making an appointment (national average 78%).

We saw several areas of outstanding practice including:

  • The practice held a “watch list”; this was a detailed list which was maintained of high risk patients such as those who required palliative care. One of the GP partners had responsibility for the list. The dedicated practice nurse undertook reviews of these patients and made regular telephone calls to them to identify any potential issues, this was in addition to the consultations they received from the GPs. There was a dedicated practice nurse who reviewed all housebound and care home patients. These were in addition to the 2% of the practice population with complex needs.
  • The practice held a dementia register and staff had received training in dementia. The dementia diagnosis rate was the highest in the CCG area at 82% (of the expected diagnosis rate) compared to the CCG average of 62%.
  • The practice was awarded a “Healthwatch Newcastle Star Award” in September 2014. Healthwatch is the independent champion for members of the public and users of health and social care services. They were nominated by a patient who used their service who wanted to thank them for going the extra mile to make their experience great.
  • The practice recognised that they needed to contact patients with serious or life limiting illnesses, to offer support. This was usually after a diagnosis from hospital. We saw an example of a letter which was sent to patients offering support from the practice and asking the patient to contact them if there was anything they could do to help.
  • The practice arranged to be inspected by North East Health Checkers who use experts by experience with learning disabilities to carry out a quality check of the practice to assess its responsiveness to patients with learning disabilities. The practice carried out an audit of cervical screening uptake in learning disability patients in order to identify any learning on how they can enable this group of patients to undertake this type of health screening.
  • The practice recognised that staff satisfaction was poor, two years earlier. The practice took action to improve the situation. They carried out leadership training for their staff and introduced 360 degree feedback for GPs. They implemented plans to improve staff satisfaction. All staff were encouraged to influence the practice’s approach to policies and procedures. A receptionist recognised a need for a protocol to be developed for transgender patients, which was written by the receptionist and formed part of the practice policies and procedures. This had positive results, staff felt supported and said the practice was a different place to work; they were now able to use their skills and initiative when this had previously not happened.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice