You are here

Archived: Wish Park Surgery Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 2 May 2019

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Wish Park Surgery on 12 March 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

At our last inspection in March 2018 we rated the practice as requires improvement. Specifically, we said they must:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.
  • 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 the duties.

We also found areas where the provider should make improvements:

  • Strengthen the guidance provided for reception staff to include identification of symptoms for potentially seriously ill patients, such as sepsis.
  • Review and improve the process to record and action safety alerts.
  • Consider ways to increase the visibility of information for patients that are carers.
  • Review and improve the system for recording verbal complaints.

At this inspection, we found that the provider had satisfactorily addressed all of these areas.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service is 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.

Overall this practice is now rated as good and good for all population groups.

Details of our findings

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • Staff worked well together as a team and all felt supported to carry out their roles. There was a strong team ethos and culture of working together for a common aim.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Strengthen the methods to identify children and adults at risk on the practice system and the systems to follow up on children who fail to attend practice appointments or at secondary care.
  • Strengthen the practice vaccination programme to include records of non-clinical members staff.
  • Continue to complete regular infection prevention and control audits.
  • Review the waiting room layout to consider solutions to increase visibility of the waiting area and confidentiality at the reception desk.
  • Continue to monitor practice performance in relation to patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation and those experiencing poor mental health.

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

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Effective

Good

Caring

Good

Responsive

Good

Well-led

Good
Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Families, children and young people

Good

Older people

Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good