We carried out a review of the data available to us about Ainsdale Medical Centre 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 Ainsdale Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.
This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection October 2016 – Good)
The key questions are rated as:
Are services safe? – Good
Are services effective? – Good
Are services caring? – Good
Are services responsive? – Good
Are services well-led? - Good
As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:
Older People – Good
People with long-term conditions – Good
Families, children and young people – Good
Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good
People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good
People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection Ainsdale Medical Centre on 16 March 2018.
At this inspection we found:
The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
The practice was a training practice and supported the training and development of doctors and GPs.
The practice infection prevention and control systems were effective.
There were systems in place to reduce risks to patient safety. For example, infection control practices were carried out appropriately and there were regular checks on the environment and on equipment used.The practice had appropriate facilities, including disabled access. It was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
Complaints had been investigated and responded to in a timely manner.
There was a clear leadership and staff structure and staff understood their roles and responsibilities.
The provider had a clear vision to provide a safe, good quality service.
Feedback from patients was used to make improvements to the service.
There was a focus on continuous learning and improvement.
Clinicians assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. The provider routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided.
Feedback from patients about the care and treatment they received from clinicians was positive.
We saw areas of outstanding practice:
The practice proactively engaged with the wider health and social care communities to support improvement and innovation. For example, working collaboratively with local health and social care services to reduce social isolation of older patients, patients with dementia and their carers and those patients affected by cancer.
A GP partner at the practice with a special interest in cardiology had a vision of how to improve the cardiovascular service offered to patients within the CCG area. The GP with the support of his GP partners took this vision to the GP Federation and the CCG and with the support of both organisations was able to set up this new service to benefit patients at every GP Practice across the CCG. This work was undertaken by the practice to provide a more effective and patient centred service. As a result of this work fewer referrals to secondary care have been made and more patients were being effectively treated and monitored by their own GP practices.
The practice used the computer system to ensure that vulnerable patient registers were refreshed each night to ensure they had the most current information to enable clinical and none clinical staff to provide appropriate support and treatment. This also supported the practices safety netting processes.
Following issues raised by the district nursing service with regard to the pain management of patients receiving end of life care, one of the GP partners devised an analgesia checklist for district nurses to use to inform and support their clinical decision making. Following a trial period, the checklist has been adopted by the CCG and is now used in all their practices.
The practice had set up an in house Diabetes Education and Self-Management for On-going and Diagnosed DESMOND group that mirrored the NHS programme to support patients with type 2 diabetes and those patients at developing the condition.
The areas where the provider should make improvements are:
The practice need to ensure all clinicians used consent forms to document patient consent for treatments such as joint injections.
Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ainsdale Medical Centre on 19 October 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
Staff had been trained to deal with medical emergencies and emergency medicines and equipment were available.
We saw areas of outstanding practice including:
The practice clearly demonstrated innovative ways of working and working with others in the health and social economy to improve patient care and treatment. For example; they undertook frailty assessments and identification of those at risk through the recently implemented frail elderly programme, supported by the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).
The practice had developed and implemented a highly effective IT system which supported good governance in an open and honest culture.
The mission statement for delivering the strategy had been developed with staff and patient representatives (patient participation group) and was widely promoted and publicised. Staff and some patients we spoke with were familiar with the practice mission statement and could articulate their values and vision for delivering high quality care.
The area where the provider should make improvement is:
Review risk assessments for undertaking a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check for non-clinical staff.
Chief Inspector of General Practice