You are here

Dr Keith T Tattum Good Also known as Dr KT Tattum

Reports


Review carried out on 12 July 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr Keith T Tattum on 12 July 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

Inspection carried out on 14/12/2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Keith Tattum on 14 December 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had 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.
  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Feedback about the appointment system was mixed; patients told us they could get an urgent appointment when needed, although some said it was difficult to book a future appointment.

We saw a feature of outstanding practice:

  • The lead GP had an interest in poor mental health. The practice used nationally recognised assessment methods in determining the levels of depression experienced by patients and also offered relevant patients a psychological assessment. Patients experiencing depression had the opportunity to enter a contract with the practice to detail their expectations and hopes for the management of their condition. Data demonstrated that the practice was effective in their management and identification of patients with depression.

There were areas where the practice should make improvements:

  • Implement changes in infection control within the practice as detailed in the infection control specialist’s audit.

  • Undertake a written risk assessment for Legionella and mitigate any risks identified.

  • Consider obtaining wider feedback from patients about the practice appointment system and improve the availability of bookable future appointments with GPs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

During a check to make sure that the improvements required had been made

When we inspected this practice on 14 June 2013 people made positive comments about the care they received. Patients said they were happy with the care and treatment they received and that they were always treated with dignity and respect.

We found that patients were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment but were not fully protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.

We asked the practice to send us an action plan to tell us how they planned to deal with the concerns we found. They sent this to us promptly. This showed that they had either already completed or were arranging the necessary improvements.

In April 2014 we asked the practice to send us an update to their action plan. The information they sent confirmed that the practice had taken the necessary action. This means that the premises are now safer for patients and staff.

Inspection carried out on 14 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with 12 patients and seven members of staff on the day of our inspection. One patient told us, �The quality of the doctors is outstanding�. Another patient told us, �I've seen doctors and nurses here and they are always helpful and polite. I think they go the extra mile�.

Patients told us that they were happy with the care and treatment they received and they were always treated with dignity and respect. We saw that patients experienced care and treatment that met their needs because they were cared for by staff that were supported to deliver care to an appropriate standard. Some patients told us that they found it difficult to get an appointment at the practice. One patient told us, "Staff are very helpful when you get to see them. It can be a bit of a problem getting through on the phone sometimes though". We saw that comments and complaints patients made were responded to appropriately. We saw that patients were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

Patients were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment but were not fully protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.