Archived: Summerfield Healthcare

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 24 May 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.

Summerfield Healthcare (Wolverhampton) is the main location for Ryminster Medical Services Limited. A branch site is located in Shrewsbury. The services provided from both locations are occupational health, GP consultations, physiotherapy, paediatric consultations, psychiatry, psychology and minor procedures.

The practice manager 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.

We gained feedback through two comment cards completed by patients. Comments made were universally positive; the service was described as excellent and helpful with positive comments on the friendliness of staff.

Our key findings were:

• There were effective systems in place for monitoring and managing risks to patient and staff safety.
• Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care and treatment was tailored to individual needs and delivered in line with current evidence based guidance such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).
• Patients’ were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
• Patients received detailed and clear information about their proposed treatment, which enabled them to make an informed decision. This included the costs, risks and benefit of the treatment.
• The service had a structured programme of quality improvement activity and routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided.
• There was effective leadership, management and governance arrangements in place that assured the delivery of high quality care and treatment. The practice held a central register of policies and procedures to govern activity.
• The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the ‘Duty of Candour’.
• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Review the arrangements for the ongoing maintenance of all equipment used at the practice to ensure they are safe to use.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)

Chief Inspector of General Practice