You are here

Archived: Dr Simria Tanvir Good Also known as North Hyde Practice

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Simria Tanvir (also known as North Hyde Practice) on 19 January 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the 19 January 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Simria Tanvir on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was a desk-based review carried out on 12 December 2016 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 19 January 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:

  • The practice ensured that non-clinical staff undertaking chaperone duties completed relevant training
  • The practice had made improvements in the assessment of risks to patients, visitors and staff. There was evidence of completed risk assessments for health and safety, fire, and legionella. Fire safety arrangements now included a schedule of internal fire alarm testing and drills.
  • The practice had implemented a comprehensive cleaning schedule and log including the frequency of deep cleaning tasks.
  • Arrangements were in place for the monitoring of prescription stationery from when received and distributed within the practice.
  • The practice had a defibrillator for use in a medical emergency.
  • There was evidence of completed audit cycles to demonstrate quality improvement.
  • Processes were in place for the induction of locum GPs who were recruited to work at the practice.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The practice is rated as good for providing safe services.

  • Non-clinical staff who undertook chaperone duties had received relevant training for the role.
  • The practice had completed risk assessments for health and safety, fire, and legionella and undertook water system testing. Fire safety arrangements included a schedule and of fire alarm testing and fire drills.
  • A comprehensive cleaning schedule and log including the frequency of deep cleaning tasks was maintained.
  • Effective arrangements were in place for the monitoring and distribution of prescription stationery within the practice.
  • The practice had a defibrillator for use in a medical emergency.

Effective

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The practice is rated as good for providing effective services.

  • An induction pack had been implemented for locum doctors recruited to work at the practice.
  • There was evidence of completed audit cycles to demonstrate quality improvement.

Caring

Good

Updated 11 May 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing caring services.

  • Data from the National GP Patient Survey showed patients rated the practice comparably to local and national averages for consultations with doctors and nurses.

  • Patients said they felt staff were helpful, polite, caring and treated them with dignity and respect.

  • Information for patients about the services available was easy to understand and accessible.

  • We saw staff treated patients with kindness and respect, and maintained patient and information confidentiality.

Responsive

Good

Updated 11 May 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing responsive services.

  • Practice staff reviewed the needs of its local population and engaged with the NHS London Team and Clinical Commissioning Group to secure improvements to services where these were identified. For example, the practice reviewed their referral rates and unplanned admissions compared to other local practices to identify areas to make improvements.

  • 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.

  • Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand and evidence showed the practice responded to issues raised. Learning from complaints was discussed and shared with staff at weekly practice meetings.

Well-led

Good

Updated 11 May 2016

The practice is rated as good for being well-led.

  • The practice had an aim to provide high quality, accessible, comprehensive and preventive healthcare in a friendly environment.

  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity and held regular governance meetings.

  • There was a governance framework which mainly supported the delivery of the strategy and good quality care. This included arrangements to monitor and improve quality and identify risk across some areas of the practice.

  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour. The partners encouraged a culture of openness and honesty.

  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on. The patient participation group was active.

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety and effective identified at our inspection on 19 January 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

Families, children and young people

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety and effective identified at our inspection on 19 January 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

Older people

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety and effective identified at our inspection on 19 January 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety and effective identified at our inspection on 19 January 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety and effective identified at our inspection on 19 January 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good

Updated 19 May 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safety and effective identified at our inspection on 19 January 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.