The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Woodchurch Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Surgery, Front Road, Woodchurch, Ashford, Kent, TN26 3SF (01233) 860236

Provided and run by:
Woodchurch Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Woodchurch Surgery on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Woodchurch Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

02 August 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at Woodchurch Surgery on 10 August 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Caring – Good

Responsive - Good

Well-led – Good

Following our previous inspection on 20 September 2016, the practice was rated Good overall and Outstanding for Responsive.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Woodchurch Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection as the practice had not been inspected since September 2016.

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 with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing facilities
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • A short site visit

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

We have rated this practice as Good overall

We found that:

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • 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.
  • The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. 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.
  • 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.
  • There was a strong, visible, person-centred culture. Staff were highly motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and promoted people’s dignity. Relationships between people who used the service, those close to them and staff were strong, caring and supportive. These relationships were highly valued by all staff and promoted by leaders.
  • Patients were respected and valued as individuals and were empowered as partners in their care, practically and emotionally, by an exceptional and distinctive service.
  • Feedback from patients was consistently positive and was higher than local and national averages.
  • The practice worked with other agencies to provide effective care to patients wherever they were located, and understood and worked to address the barriers to access faced by homeless patients.
  • The practice had identified areas where there were gaps in provision locally and had taken steps to address them.
  • There was a focus on innovation and improvement, for example recognising homeless people were likely to have multiple and complex needs and poor health outcomes without effective support. The practice had a clear mission to provide homeless and refugee patients with access to a high-quality primary care service.
  • Services were tailored to meet the needs of individual people and were delivered in a way to ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care.
  • The involvement of other organisations and the local community was integral to how services were planned and ensured services met people’s needs. There were innovative approaches to providing integrated person-centred pathways of care that involved other service providers, particularly for people with multiple and complex needs.
  • There was a proactive approach to understanding the needs of different groups of people and to deliver care in a way that met those needs and promoted equality. This included people who were in vulnerable circumstances or who have complex needs.

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

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

26 April 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Martin Busk and Partners on 20 September 2016. The practice was rated as requires improvement in the safe domain and outstanding for responsive. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report on the 20 September 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Martin Busk and Partners on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 26 April 2017 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 20 September 2016. 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:

  • Since our inspection in September 2016 the practice had revised and improved the safe management of medicines in the dispensary.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

20 September 2016

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Martin Busk and Partners on 20 September 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 in place for reporting and recording significant events. However, an error which occurred within the dispensary had not been escalated to practice level or treated as a significant event.
  • Risks to patients were generally assessed and well managed. However, the dispensary door did not have a lock and the storage and destruction of patient own returned controlled drugs within the practice was not recorded in a controlled drug register.
  • 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.
  • The practice had a flexible, patient focused approach to accessing services. Patients told us the practice was central to their community and was friendly and accessible. Notable examples of this included one patient who told us how their GP had undertaken a home visit for a visiting relative who was unwell although not registered with the practice.
  • 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.
  • A higher proportion of patients were satisfied with how they could access services compared to the CCG and national averages, for example by being able to get through easily by phone and with the practice opening times.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice provided access to services seven days a week through a collaboration with two neighbouring surgeries. This service provided access to urgent appointments at the weekend from 9am to noon on Saturday and Sunday for over 25,000 patients. This meant patients did not have to travel to hospital Accident and Emergency Departments and could access services locally. GPs across all three practices, including Woodchurch, participated in providing this service. GPs and staff providing this service had access to patients’ notes providing continuity of care for patients attending urgent care clinics.
  • The practice worked with neighbouring practices to operate a virtual ward as part of a local collaboration. They employed a network manager to chair fortnightly multi-disciplinary meetings where the needs of the most vulnerable patients would be discussed and action taken to provide coordinated support for them. In addition, the practice ran their own weekly multi-disciplinary meeting within the practice.
  • The practice supported a local re-ablement project in nursing homes where patients were supported to return to their own homes. GPs worked closely with nursing home staff and other members of the multi-disciplinary teams to support this project.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure that all medicines are managed safely within the practice dispensary. Specifically the provider is to ensure that the receipt and destruction of patient own controlled drugs is recorded in a controlled drug register, that the dispensary door can be secured and is kept locked and that dispensary errors are reviewed in line with the practice significant event policy.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice