You are here

Dr Ravi Sharma Good Also known as St Peter's Medical Practice

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Ravi Sharma on 1 September 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the September 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Ravi Sharma on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 21 March 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 1 September 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 had implemented a procedure for the monitoring and management of high risk medication and patients receiving.

  • The practice had clinical meetings in place with the nurse, GP and the long term locum.

  • The practice had an improvement plan including clinical audits.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

At the inspection in September 2016 we found that the practice processes for prescribing high risk medication and monitoring was not in place or being monitored formally.

The practice had taken appropriate action and is now rated good for the provision of safe services.

  • At this recent inspection we found that the practice had implemented a process for prescribing high risk medication and monitoring was in place.

Effective

Good

Updated 20 April 2017

At the inspection in September 2016 the practice were not able to demonstrate quality improvement. Clinical audits were limited and there was no audit plan in place. The practice clinical team did not have meetings to ensure information was shared and patients were discussed.

The practice had taken appropriate action and is now rated good for the provision of effective services.

  • The practice had an audit plan for the year.

  • We looked at four completed two cycle audits that the practice had undertaken. One of these had been undertaken following a significant event that the practice had completed. The audits showed improvement in processes and in prescribing.

  • The practice had clinical team meetings which had been in place since November 2016 and we reviewed four sets of minutes. The meeting minutes showed that the clinical team including the practice nurse and the long term locum were discussing patients that needed to be discussed and sharing information such as recent guidance and audits completed.

Caring

Good

Updated 14 October 2016

The practice is rated as good for providing caring services.

  • Data from the national GP patient survey showed patients rated the practice higher than others for several aspects of care.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment.

  • 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 14 October 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 England Area Team and Clinical Commissioning Group to secure improvements to services where these were identified.

  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with 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 quickly to issues raised.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 October 2016

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

  • The practice had a strategy to deliver high quality care and promote good outcomes for patients. Staff were clear about their responsibilities in relation to it.

  • 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 meetings.

  • There was an overarching governance framework which supported the delivery of the strategy and good quality care. This included arrangements to monitor and improve quality and identify risk.

  • 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 had systems in place for notifiable safety incidents and ensured this information was shared with staff to ensure appropriate action was taken

  • 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 20 April 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safe and effective identified at our inspection on 1 September 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 20 April 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safe and effective identified at our inspection on 1 September 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 20 April 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safe and effective identified at our inspection on 1 September 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 20 April 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safe and effective identified at our inspection on 1 September 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 20 April 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safe and effective identified at our inspection on 1 September 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 20 April 2017

The provider had resolved the concerns for safe and effective identified at our inspection on 1 September 2016 which applied to everyone using this practice, including this population group. The population group ratings have been updated to reflect this.