You are here

Dr Sanjay Kumar Sen Good Also known as Clifford House Medical Centre

Reports


Review carried out on 30 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr Sanjay Kumar Sen on 30 November 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 9 June 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Sanjay Kumar Sen on 12 August 2016.The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report can be found by selecting the Dr Sanjay Kumar Sen ‘all reports’ link for on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced comprehensive inspection carried out on 9 June 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 12 August 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now 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 a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.

• The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.

• Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.

• Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.

• Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.

• Patients we spoke with 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 the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 12 August 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Sanjay Kumar Sen on 12 August 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows;

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. However when we spoke with staff some incidents that had occurred had not been reported and no learning points or action had been taken.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to medical emergencies.
  • Data showed patient outcomes were low compared to the national average. Although some audits had been carried out, we saw no evidence that audits were driving improvements to patient outcomes.
  • The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity, but some were overdue a review.
  • 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. 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 the GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure staff receive and can demonstrate knowledge required in the safe keeping and use of AED equipment.

  • Ensure they undertake infection control audits according to their policy.

  • Ensure they improve the process of audits so as to drive improvements to patient outcomes.

In addition the provider should:

  • Should ensure they maintain all arrangements for managing emergency equipment.

  • Ensure that improvements are made to the business continuity plan.

  • Ensure they have systems to monitor and record all staff meetings and meetings with other professionals.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 24 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with six people who use the service. Each person we spoke with told us they were satisfied with the service received. One person said "the doctor is always very kind to me". Another person told us "I'm always treated with dignity and respect. They're very friendly, always put me at ease".

We found that people were satisfied with the overall level of medical care received, and that the provider had appropriate plans in place for foreseeable emergencies. We saw that the provider had taken steps to ensure staff were aware of their roles in protecting children and vulnerable adults from abuse.

We found that people were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment, and that the provider had engaged a new cleaner as they weren't satisfied with the service. We noted that equipment used on the premises was safe and well-maintained, and that the premises had been very recently refurbished, and redecorated to a high standard.

The provider had taken steps to ensure that staff were qualified, skilled and experienced. We found that the provider had some systems in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service.