Haydock Medical Centre

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Haydock Medical Centre on 21 July 2023.

Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

The key question ratings are as follows:

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Caring - Good

Responsive - Good

Well-led – Good

Modality Partnership registered Haydock Medical Centre with CQC in January 2023 following a merger with the previous provider. This is the first inspection of the service under the new provider.

During the inspection process, the practice highlighted efforts they are making to improve outcomes and treatment for their population. The effect of these efforts is not (yet) reflected in verified outcomes data. As such, the ratings for this inspection have not been impacted. However, we continue to monitor the data and where we see potential changes, we will follow these up with the practice.

Why we carried out this inspection

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

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.
• Speaking with a member of the patient participation group.
• 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 provider had established systems and processes to ensure good governance;
• Practice leaders had identified potential risk and areas for improvement and had developed action plans to mitigate risk and ensure continuous improvement;
• The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of person-centre care and protected patients from avoidable harm;
• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs although the recording standard of medication reviews was in need of evaluation for some patients;
• Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and utilised social prescribing to help improve patient’s health and wellbeing;
• The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients so they could access care and treatment in a timely way.

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

• Take action to undertake structured management reviews in accordance with recommended best practice guidelines;
• Update complaints information and correspondence to include the contact details of the Cheshire and Merseyside Integrated Care Board so patients know how to escalate their complaints;
• Progress action plans to further improve access and cervical cancer screening and child immunisation uptake;
• Decommission the previous practice websites so that patients access the most up-to-date website for the provider;
• Embed into practice the provision of formal supervision for non-medical prescribers.

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 Health Care