The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Cedars Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

26 Swanley Centre, Swanley, Kent, BR8 7AH (01322) 663111

Provided and run by:
Swanley Medical Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

7 February 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about The Cedars Surgery on 7 February 2020. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

15 November 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating October 2014 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection 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 inspection at The Cedars Surgery on 15 November 2018, 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 provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

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 areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue to monitor and ensure the system for recording the use of local anaesthetic is effective.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence tables for further information.

7 October 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Cedars Surgery on 7 October 2014.  During the inspection we gathered information from a variety of sources. For example; we will spoke with patients, members of the patient participation group, interviewed staff of all levels and checked that the right systems and processes were in place.

Overall the practice is rated as good. This is because we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led services. It was also good for providing services for  the care of older people, people with long term conditions , families, children and young people, the working-age people, of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia). 

Our key findings 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.
  • People’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with current legislation. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs have been identified and planned.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. Information to help patients understand the services available was easy to understand. We also saw that staff treated patients with kindness and respect, and maintained confidentiality.
  • 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. The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • There was a leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. There was an active patient participation group.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should

  • Improve the quality of record keeping in relation to training to ensure effective monitoring and updates are undertaken and completed in a timely manner.
  • Ensure that contingency planning, triage by receptionists and management of medicines are supported by documented protocols and processes that all the staff can work to and recognise.
  • Improve the quality and timeliness of clinical governance arrangements.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice