The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Shakespeare Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Chandler House, Worsley Mesnes Health Centre, Poolstock Lane, Wigan, Greater Manchester, WN3 5HL (01942) 481531

Provided and run by:
Shakespeare Surgery Ltd

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Shakespeare 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 Shakespeare Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

15 May 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Shakespeare Surgery on 15 May 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.

1st June 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Shakespeare Surgery on 1st June 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.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained 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.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. There was also easy-read versions with pictures for patients with learning disabilities . 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 phlebotomy service was commissioned by the practice for the benefit of all patients but particularly for the benefit of the vulnerable and elderly population.

We saw an area of outstanding practice:

The practice continually monitored, reviewed, learned and changed their working practice to ensure positive outcomes for patients. They did this through regular and open reporting and review of significant events which included all staff, continual audit and reflection, and feedback from staff, students and patients. We saw examples where new protocols and services had been implemented and monitored to ensure they were effective such as the coil and implant service for women.

We saw an area where the practice should make improvement:

The provider should undertake a risk assessment for the mounting of sharps boxes.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice