You are here

Dr Roshan Khuroo Good Also known as Stockland Green Practice

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 31 October 2018

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating October 2017 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services responsive? – Good

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Dr Roshan Khuroo (also known as Stockland Green Practice) on 10 October 2017 to follow up on areas where the practice should make improvements in effective, caring and responsive key questions. The full report on the October 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Roshan Khuroo on our website at .

This inspection was an announced desk-based review carried out on 1 October 2018 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to improve in areas we identified in our previous inspection on 10 October 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those areas and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found:

  • The 2018 national GP patient survey results indicated positive changes in patient satisfaction. For example, patients found the appointment system easy to use and were able to access care when they needed it.
  • Prior to our inspection, we sent the practice a quantity of comment cards and a secure box for patients to put their comment cards in once completed. We collected the completed Care Quality Commission (CQC) comment cards prior to our desk-based review. Completed comment cards indicated high levels of patient satisfaction.
  • Since our previous inspection, staff had received additional training in areas such as customer care and privacy and dignity. National survey results and completed CQC patient comment cards showed that staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Members of the management team we spoke with as part of our desk-based review showed a strong focus on improvement to enhance patient experience.
  • Since our previous inspection, the practice continued carrying out actions to improve the uptake of national screening.
  • For example, staff proactively followed up patients who did not attend cervical screening appointments and continued providing information on the benefits of being screened. Unverified data provided by the practice showed a 10% increase since December 2017.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence tables for further information.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Effective

Good

Caring

Good

Responsive

Good

Updated 31 October 2018

At our previous inspection on 10 October 2017, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing responsive services as survey results showed low patient satisfaction in areas such as clinical consultations and timely access to services. The practice were unable to demonstrate that they had reviewed survey results or put actions in place to improve patient satisfaction.

When we undertook a fellow up desk-based review on 01 October 2018, published survey data and patient feedback indicated positive changes in patient satisfaction. The practice, and all of the population groups is now rated as good for providing responsive services.

Timely access to care and treatment

When we carried out our October 2017 inspection, published data and patient feedback showed that patients were not always able to access care and treatment from the practice within an acceptable timescale for their needs. At the time of our previous inspection, the practice had developed an action plan and were in the early stages of implementing changes. For example, a new phone system was installed and GPs were doing longer clinics. Since our previous inspection, national survey results published in August 2018 indicated positive improvements in patient’s satisfaction with access to care and treatment. Patient feedback received through completed Care Quality Commission (CQC) comment cards as well as comments placed on NHS Choices web page were aligned with national survey results. At this inspection, we found that:

  • Patients had timely access to initial assessment, test results, diagnosis and treatment.
  • Waiting times, delays and cancellations were minimal and managed appropriately.
  • Patients with the most urgent needs had their care and treatment prioritised.
  • The practices GP patient survey results were mainly above local and national averages for questions relating to access to care and treatment. The practice was aware of the data, and explained that ongoing actions which were in their early stages at the time of our October 2017 inspection, had started to show positive impact on patient’s satisfaction. For example, the practice had a new phone system installed prior to our previous inspection, members of the management team explained that patient satisfaction with phone access has gradually improved over the years.
  • The practice had an active patient participation group who met with the practice every three months. Documents provided by the practice demonstrated active discussions regarding survey results and updates regarding changes to improve phone access such as having three receptionists operating the phone lines during busy periods as well as effective care navigation.

Please refer to the evidence tables for further information.

Well-led

Good
Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Good

Families, children and young people

Good

Older people

Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Good