Burdwood Surgery

Ratings

• Overall

  Good

• Safe

  Good

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Good

Our view of the service

Date of inspection: 5 June 2026

Burdwood Surgery is a GP practice and delivers services to approximately 10,350 patients under a contract held with NHS England.

According to the latest available data, the ethnic make-up of the service area is approximately 94.3% White, 2.3% Asian, 1.9% Mixed, 0.9% Black and 0.5% Other. Information published by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows deprivation within the service population group is in the 10th decile (10 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the service population is relative to others.

This was a focused inspection. We undertook this inspection due to the length of time since our last inspection. We assessed 10 quality statements from across all 5 key questions. This inspection 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.

• SAFE: Staff kept facilities clean and maintained equipment appropriately to ensure people were kept safe. They assessed and managed the risk of infection well and took steps to control the risk of it spreading. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience.

• EFFECTIVE: Staff supported people to live healthier lives, monitoring their care and treatment to ensure they received positive and consistent outcomes. This support, specifically the support for managing respiratory conditions had been recognised nationally.

• CARING: Staff treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion, and respected their privacy and dignity.

• RESPONSIVE: People could access care, treatment and support when they needed it, however some patient feedback highlighted poor experiences of using the online access tool. Leaders and staff were alert to discrimination and inequality that could disadvantage groups of people who used the service and sought ways to address any barriers.

• WELL-LED: The practice had a clear vision and strategy, which considered the needs of the people who used their service, the wider community and the future of primary care. Staff understood their individual roles and responsibilities. Leaders accounted for the actions, behaviours and performance of staff through clear and effective governance processes.

People's experience of this service

As part of our inspection, we reviewed feedback from people who used the practice to understand their views and experience. This included speaking with people using the service at the time of our inspection and reviewing other feedback available to us. People were positive about the quality of their care and treatment. They described how staff treated them with kindness and compassion and respected their privacy. This was mirrored in the results of recent surveys, including the 2025 National GP Patient Survey, which showed people were satisfied, especially regarding the ease of accessing services and the care and attention of staff.

We received over 185 items of feedback from patients as a result of the practice sharing information and the direct website link to ‘CQC Give Feedback on Care’ to patients, which on the whole was positive. Patients gave examples of staff taking time to explain decisions and pathways of care whilst being kind and compassionate. The negative feedback we received was reviewed, anonymised and themed into areas for the practice to review. Themes identified within the negative feedback related to access and appointments, specifically the online appointment and triage tool. The practice responded positively to CQC sharing the themes and suggested they would continue to review feedback, data and capacity and make further adjustments. These adjustments would be shared with patients including the patient participation group (PPG).

The practice promoted and monitored patient feedback collected via the NHS ‘Friends and Family’ Test results. We reviewed the most recent responses collected and verified from February 2026 (271 responses), March 2026 (239 responses) and April 2026 (322 responses). Using the combined responses from the last 3 months, 97% rated the service received at the practice as either ‘Good’ or ‘Very Good’.

There was an active PPG who represented the views of people using the service. A representative from the PPG described how leaders made positive changes because of feedback. They spoke highly of their involvement and relationship with the practice, highlighting collaborative work including volunteer-led blood pressure events as part of the practices attempts to identify hypertension (high blood pressure which can lead to serious health concerns such as heart disease and stroke).

The representative also provided feedback from their perspective as a patient. This feedback aligned to the other positive patient feedback collected throughout this inspection.