• Doctor
  • GP practice

Medway Medical Centre

Overall: Inadequate read more about inspection ratings

90-92 Malvern Road, Gillingham, Kent, ME7 4BB (01634) 578333

Provided and run by:
Dr V Murthy & Partners

Important: We are carrying out a review of quality at Medway Medical Centre. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

All Inspections

5 and 6 September 2023

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection at Medway Medical Centre on 5 and 6 September 2023. Overall, the practice is rated as Inadequate.

The ratings for each key question are:

  • Safe – Inadequate
  • Effective – Inadequate
  • Caring – Requires Improvement
  • Responsive – Inadequate
  • Well-led – Inadequate

The full comprehensive report can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Medway Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Why we carried out this inspection:

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection at Medway Medical Centre on 5 and 6 September 2023 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008, following information of concern. The report covers our findings.

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:

  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A site visit.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.

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.
  • Information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • The practice’s systems, practices and processes did not always keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
  • To ensure patient safety, improvements were required to the practice’s systems and processes that ensured: the effective management of infection prevention and control; the assessment, monitoring and management of risks; the effective arrangements for managing medicines; learning and making improvements when things went wrong; complaints were being used to improve the quality of care; the practice culture effectively supporting high quality sustainable care; overall governance arrangements being effective.
  • Staff did not always have the information they needed to deliver safe care and treatment.
  • Patients’ needs were not always assessed, and care and treatment were not always delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance supported by clear pathways and tools.
  • Published results showed uptake rates for childhood immunisations were below the target of 90% in all the 5 indicators as of 31 March 2022 and the practice’s uptake for cervical screening as of March 2023 was 59% (significantly below the 80% coverage target for the national screening programme).
  • The practice was unable to demonstrate that staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles; that staff treated patients with kindness, respect and compassion and respecting patients’ privacy and dignity.
  • Feedback from patients was negative about the way staff treated people and national GP patient survey published in July 2023 was below local and England averages in all 5 indicators (significantly so for 2 of these relating to access).
  • Services did not always meet patients’ needs and people were not always able to access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • Leaders could not demonstrate that they had the capacity and skills to deliver high quality sustainable care and whilst the practice had a clear vision, it was not supported by a credible strategy to provide high quality sustainable care.
  • The practice did not always act on appropriate and accurate information and they did not involve the public, staff and external partners to sustain high quality and sustainable care.
  • There was little evidence of systems and processes for learning, continuous improvement and innovation.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • The provider must establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.
  • The provider must ensure persons employed in the provision of the regulated activity receive the appropriate support, training, professional development, supervision and appraisal necessary to enable them to carry out their duties.

Due to the seriousness of the breaches of the Health and Safety Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 found at this inspection, we took urgent action and imposed the following conditions on the provider’s registration with CQC:

The registered person must not register any new patients at Medway Medical Centre (including Railside branch surgery and Upper Canterbury Street branch surgery) without the written permission of the Care Quality Commission unless those patients are newly born babies or are newly fostered or adopted children of patients already registered at Medway Medical Centre.

The registered person must submit to the Care Quality Commission, on a monthly basis, a written report of progress made against the action plan submitted to the Care Quality Commission on 25 September 2023.

We also issued 2 Warning Notices in line with our enforcement processes for breaches of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014: Regulation 17 - Good governance and Regulation 18 - Staffing.

I am placing this service in special measures. Services placed in special measures will be inspected again within six months. If insufficient improvements have been made such that there remains a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures to begin the process of preventing the provider from operating the service. This will lead to cancelling their registration or to varying the terms of their registration within six months if they do not improve.

The service will be kept under review and if needed could be escalated to urgent enforcement action. Where necessary, another inspection will be conducted within a further six months, and if there is not enough improvement, we will move to close the service by adopting our proposal to remove this location or cancel the provider’s registration. Special measures will give people who use the service the reassurance that the care they get should improve.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Health Care

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

5 May 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Medway Medical Centre on 8 October 2019. The overall rating for the practice was Good but the Safe domain was rated as Requires Improvement. The full comprehensive report on the October 2019 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Medway Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

After our inspection in October 2019 the practice wrote to us with an action plan outlining how they would make the necessary improvements to comply with the regulations.

Why we carried out this inspection:

We carried out an announced focussed follow-up inspection on 5 May 2021 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection in October 2019. This report covers findings in relation to those requirements.

How we carried out the inspection:

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was in line with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit.

Our judgement of the quality of care at this service is based 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.

This practice remains rated as Good overall.

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

We rated the practice as good for providing safe services because:

  • The provider had made improvements to their systems, practices and processes to help keep people safe.
  • The provider had made improvements so that risks to patients, staff and visitors were assessed, monitored or managed in an effective manner.
  • The arrangements for medicines management continued to help keep patients safe.

At this inspection we also found:

  • The provider had moved the front door call bell button to a height that could be reached by all people with disabilities as well as carried out a disability risk assessment of the practice.
  • The provider had taken action to improve patient satisfaction where results were below local and national averages. However, ongoing monitoring and action were required.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue to monitor national GP patient survey results and take action to improve patient satisfaction where results are below local and national averages.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

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

8 October 2019

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall.

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires Improvement

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 Medway Medical Centre on 8 October 2019 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008, as part of our regulatory functions.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice’s systems, practices and processes did not always help to keep people safe.
  • Risks to patients, staff and visitors were not always assessed, monitored and managed in an effective manner.
  • Staff had the information they needed to deliver safe care and treatment to patients.
  • The arrangements for managing medicines helped to keep patients safe.
  • The practice learned and made improvements when things went wrong.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients were able to access care and treatment from the practice within an acceptable timescale for their needs.
  • Where national GP patient survey results were below average the practice was taking action to address the findings and improve patient satisfaction.
  • There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Monitor sharps disposal so that used sharps are disposed of correctly at all times.
  • Consider introducing an inventory of all emergency equipment and keeping records of when this equipment is checked.
  • Consider moving the front door call bell button to a height that can be reached by all people with disabilities as well as carrying out a disability risk assessment of the practice.
  • Continue to monitor national GP patient survey results and take action to improve patient satisfaction where results are below local and national averages.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

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

19 April 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Medway Medical Centre on 19 April 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are;

  • Develop a website to further support the online prescriptions and appointments service.

  • Revise governance processes to help ensure that all documents used to govern activity are up to date.

  • Consider revising the mix of staff to provide patients with the choice of seeing a female GP.

  • Record multidisciplinary meetings that take place.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice