The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr Asad Zaman

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Shah Zaman Surgery, Castle Vale Primary Care Centre, 70 Tangmere Drive, Birmingham, West Midlands, B35 7QX (0121) 465 1500

Provided and run by:
Dr Asad Zaman

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

6 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr Asad Zaman on 6 August 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.

9 November 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Asad Zaman practice on 9 November 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 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 good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. 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 a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority. The strategy to deliver this vision had been produced with stakeholders and was regularly reviewed and discussed with staff.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from patients, which it acted on. The practice had patient participation group which supported practice development.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
  • There was a strong team culture and the practice was cohesive and organised.

There were improvements the provider should make.

  • The practice should take action to address the lower than average ratings for national cancer screening.

  • The practice should consider how they can increase the number of carers registered at the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice