The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Basuto Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

29 Basuto Road, London, SW6 4BJ (020) 7736 7557

Provided and run by:
Dr Hamish McMichen

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Basuto 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 Basuto Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

25 June 2019

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection – January 2018- not rated)

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

We carried out an announced comprehensive at Basuto Medical Centre as part of our inspection programme.

There were no breaches of legal requirements at the last inspection. However, some recommendations were made which were all addressed promptly following the inspection.

Basuto Medical Centre is an independent private GP practice founded by the principle GP in 1990. The service provides primary medical services to fee paying patients. Access to the service is either on a ‘pay as you use’ basis or by an annual subscription plan which includes a set number of consultations per year.

The principal doctor at the practice is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There was positive feedback from patients who use the service. We received 16 completed comment cards. Comments were all positive and included feedback about the ‘excellent’ service, helpful, caring and dedicated staff and thorough care received.

Our key findings were:

  • There was an effective system for reporting and recording significant events. The service had systems in place to identify, investigate and learn from incidents relating to the safety of patients and staff members.
  • Staff had received appropriate training according to their role.
  • Patient feedback about reception staff and clinical staff was positive.
  • Complaints had been dealt with in line with the regulations.
  • Care and treatment was provided in a modern, clean and well organised environment.
  • There were systems, processes and practices in place to safeguard patients from abuse.
  • The service had processes in place to securely share relevant information with others such as the patient’s GP and private healthcare providers.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue with the planned programme of refurbishment to ensuring the treatment room areas meet infection control best practice.
  • Review systems to monitor the ambient temperatures of where medicines are stored to ensure they are stored within manufacturers guidelines.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGPChief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

30 January 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 30 January 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

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

Are services effective?

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

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

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

Are services well-led?

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

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Basuto Medical Centre is an independent private GP service located in the residential area of Parsons Green, South West London. The service provides primary medical services for fee-paying patients.

As part of our inspection, we asked for CQC comment cards to be completed by patients. All the 29 patient comment cards we received were positive about the service experienced. Staff were described by patients as very caring, considerate, courteous, attentive and kind. Some comments referred to the efficiency of making an appointment and unhurried consultations. We were unable to speak with any patients directly at the inspection.

Our key findings were:

  • The service had systems and processes to minimise most risks to patient safety.
  • The service had adequate arrangements for response to medical emergencies and major incidents.
  • There was a process for reporting and investigating significant events and incidents, but documentation did not provide clarity of reflective analysis and learning.
  • Staff received essential training, and adequate staff recruitment and monitoring information was retained.
  • There was some evidence of quality improvement activity and clinical audit initiatives. Patient feedback indicated that staff were caring and courteous and treated them with dignity and respect.
  • The service responded to patient complaints in line with their policy.
  • The service had good facilities and was equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There were systems in place to collect and analyse feedback from patients.
  • The provider was aware of and had systems to ensure compliance with the requirements of the duty of candour.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Review the arrangements for the disposal of sharps used to administer cytostatic medicines.
  • Review the arrangements for not requiring patients to provide identification when registering with the service.
  • Consider incorporating more detailed reflective analysis and learning in the documentation of significant events and incidents.
  • Further develop quality improvement activity to include complete clinical audits.
  • Review the 18-month cervical screening reminder process to ensure inclusion of all relevant patients and embed the newly implemented process for inadequate sample monitoring.
  • Review the systems for identifying the learning needs of clinical staff.

24 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with three patients during our visit. These patients were very satisfied with the service they received from their GP. One of the comments we received was "it's a great practice". We observed patients being treated with dignity and respect. A patient commented that staff were "polite and friendly." Patients understood the care and treatment choices available to them and felt they were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. In general patients were able to make an appointment to see their GP without many problems.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure patient's safety and welfare. A patient told us "doctors have been very thorough and have always given me time".

Patients said the practice was clean. There were systems in place to control the spread of infection.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place to ensure patients were cared for by suitably experienced and qualified staff.

Basuto Medical Centre had an effective quality assurance procedure ensuring that the quality of service provided was monitored and relevant improvements were implemented.

20 December 2011

During a routine inspection

People who use the service were not available for interview during our visit. There were questionnaires and other information that people had completed. These told us that people were satisfied with the service provided. They had the consultation procedure and treatments explained to them including any risks that may be attached to them.

They did not directly comment on the clinic's quality assurance system or number of staff but did tell us they were happy with the service they had received and way it was delivered.