You are here

South Reading Surgery Good Also known as South Reading and Shinfield Group Medical Centre

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at South Reading Surgery on 13 September 2017. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the September 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for South Reading Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 14 March 2018 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 on 13 September 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • There was an appropriate system in place to respond to complaints and share learning arising from complaints.

  • There was an effective system in place for keeping emergency equipment and medicines needed for medical emergencies. Both equipment and medicines were regularly checked.

  • Staff received training appropriate to their roles.

  • The practice had an action plan underway to improve access to the practice by telephone and to appointments. Whilst the actions identified were underway it was too early to evaluate whether they would be effective in improving access to the service.

  • Staffing structures had been reviewed and recruitment campaigns launched to increase clinical staffing levels. Two part time practice nurses and a clinical pharmacist had been recruited.

  • Staff were involved in the management of the practice via a weekly team meeting attended by team leaders and the partners.

  • The practice had responded to an incident when water supply to part of the premises had been interrupted. A proposal to alter the business continuity plan had been recorded for agreement by the partners.

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

    Importantly, the provider should:

  • Monitor implementation of their action plan and evaluate whether actions taken to improve access are effective.

At our previous inspection on 13 September 2017, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing responsive services because feedback from patients was poor in regard to accessing the practice by telephone and obtaining appointments. At this inspection we found that the practice had clear plans in place to address patient feedback. However, the plan had commenced and there was further work to be undertaken. It was too early to evaluate if the plan would improve access. Consequently, the practice is still rated as requires improvement for providing responsive services.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 2 November 2017

As a result of our inspection in January 2017 the practice was placed in special measures. The new provider was able to demonstrate they had made improvements when we undertook this inspection on 13 September 2017. The practice is rated as good for providing safe services.

  • From the sample of documented examples we reviewed, we found there was an effective system for reporting and recording significant events; lessons were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice. When things went wrong patients were informed as soon as practicable, received reasonable support, truthful information and appropriate support. They were told about any actions to improve processes to prevent the same thing happening again.
  • Staff demonstrated that they understood their responsibilities and all had received training on safeguarding children and vulnerable adults relevant to their role.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to prescription security, emergency medicine provision and patient group directions.

Effective

Good

Updated 2 November 2017

As a result of our inspection in January 2017 the practice was placed in special measures. However, the issues identified did not relate to any concerns with the effective domain. The practice is rated as good for providing effective services.

  • Data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework showed patient outcomes were at or above average compared to the national average.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance.
  • Clinical audits demonstrated quality improvement.
  • There was evidence of appraisals and personal development plans for all staff.
  • Staff worked with other health care professionals to understand and meet the range and complexity of patients’ needs.
  • End of life care was coordinated with other services involved.
  • GPs did not have an effective system in place to ensure all patients referred for a potential cancer diagnosis, had received an appointment under the two week referral scheme.
  • Staff had the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment. However, one new member of clinical staff was unable to demonstrate an appropriate understanding of the mental capacity act (MCA) 2010 and they had been booked to undertake refresher training.

Caring

Good

Updated 2 November 2017

As a result of our inspection in January 2017 the practice was placed in special measures. The new provider was able to demonstrate they had made improvements on 13 September 2017. The practice is rated as good for providing caring services.

  • Data from latest the national GP patient survey showed patients rated the practice lower than others for some aspects of care. For example, 75% of patients said the GP gave them enough time compared to the clinical commissioning group average of 80% and the national average of 86%.
  • The majority of patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. However, not all felt cared for, supported and listened to.
  • The practice had identified the poor patient feedback from the GP national survey results and was developing an action plan of improvement.

Well-led

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The practice had undertaken a range of actions that resulted in improvement to governance and management.

• The practice had completed actions to identify, assess and manage risk. Risks to patients had been reduced.

• Engagement with patients had been undertaken and there were systems in place to respond to patient feedback.

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The provider had taken the action included in their action plan and this population group is now rated good.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The provider had taken the action included in their action plan and this population group is now rated good.

Older people

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The provider had taken the action included in their action plan and this population group is now rated good.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The provider had taken the action included in their action plan and this population group is now rated good.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The provider had taken the action included in their action plan and this population group is now rated good.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 19 April 2018

The provider had taken the action included in their action plan and this population group is now rated good.