The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Killamarsh Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

209 Sheffield Road, Killamarsh, Sheffield, South Yorkshire, S21 1DX (0114) 251 0000

Provided and run by:
Killamarsh Medical Practice

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 26 – 30 September 2025.

Killamarsh Medical Practice is a GP practice and delivers services to 8,494 people under a contract held with NHS England. We carried out an assessment of this service because it has not been inspected since 14 December 2015. The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice area is 97.4% white, 1.3% mixed, 0.8% Asian, 0.3% black and other 0.2%. The age distribution of the practice population shows there is a higher number of older people registered with the practice and a lower number of working age and young people. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 8th decile (8 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood risks although some of the required risk assessments were not in place. The provider sent us evidence that they had been completed or had planned completion dates. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers updated their training matrix to include additional training in response to findings during our assessment. Staff received regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care and a formal system of clinical supervision for non-medical prescribers was introduced. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking into account people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Outcomes for people were positive and consistent. National screening indicators regularly exceeded expectations. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff involved those important to people to make decisions in people’s best interests when they did not have capacity.

Feedback from people was mixed regarding being treated with kindness and compassion. Where issues with staff attitudes had been identified, appropriate action had been taken. Staff protected people’s privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The practice had been awarded the Carer Friendly Practice Quality Mark in recognition of the support provided to carers. The service proactively supported staff wellbeing.

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand although this was not always coded appropriately in their records. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. Patient feedback showed that the service was not always easy to access. The provider had made changes to improve this. People received fair and equal care and treatment. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Governance processes needed to be strengthened to support the management of the service. Managers and staff worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There was a culture of continuous improvement with staff given time and resources to try new ideas.

 

14 December 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr JA Sutherland’s practice (Killamarsh Medical Practice) on 14 December 2015. 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, and we saw evidence that learning was applied from events.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment, and clinicians had lead areas of responsibility.
  • Feedback from patients about their care was consistently and strongly positive.
  • 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.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a GP, and usually this was with a GP of their choice. Routine appointments could often be booked on the day and if not, they were available within two days. Urgent appointments were available the same day, and the practice offered additional appointments on a sit and wait at the end of each morning surgery.
  • The practice offered a minor injuries service and data demonstrated that 28 of 30 patients who had accessed this service since April 2015, had been treated without the need for referral to another unit such as the Accident & Emergency (A&E) department.

  • The practice used clinical audits to review patient care and took action to improve services as a result.

  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. This was to be enhanced by an extension, including seven new consulting rooms, which was under construction at the time of our inspection.
  • The practice worked well with the wider multi-disciplinary team to plan and deliver effective and responsive care to keep vulnerable patients safe. This approach had impacted on unplanned hospital admissions and attendance at Accident and Emergency.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • The practice reviewed feedback from patients acted upon it. For example, further to comments made on the NHS Choices website, the practice ensured that a member of the reception team was always placed at the front of the reception desk during opening hours.
  • The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a consequence of feedback from patients and from the patient participation group. For example, as part of the extension to the building, the access road would be widened with a footpath to aid patient access from the car park.

We saw two areas of outstanding practice:

  • A community pharmacist visited weekly and worked with the practice and the CCG medicine management technician on a variety of prescribing matters. The pharmacist reviewed spirometry results (spirometry is a test used to help diagnose and monitor some lung conditions by measuring how much air can be expelled in one forced breath) and reviewed patients with diagnosed lung disease for advice and medication reviews. The pharmacist had also audited patients with atrial fibrillation to determine if anti-coagulation therapy was required in line with recognised guidance.Approximately 20-25 patients were seen by the pharmacist each month.

  • The practice employed their own community matron and care co-ordinator who managed patients by developing individualised care plans involving the wider health and social care team. This helped to keep patients safe in their own home (and in care homes), and also facilitated earlier hospital discharges. Alongside the practice’s proactive approach in providing good access to GP appointments, a measurable impact was seen in the lower attendance at out of hours and A&E services, and the lower rates of unplanned hospital admissions for this practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice