The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Kepier Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Leyburn Grove, Houghton Le Spring, Tyne and Wear, DH4 5EQ (0191) 584 2106

Provided and run by:
Kepier Medical Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Kepier Medical Practice 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 Kepier Medical Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

12 July 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Kepier Medical Practice on 12 July 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.

20 January 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Kepier Medical Practice on 20 January 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and generally well managed. The exception to this was the practices failure to carry out fire evacuation drills.
  • The practice carried out clinical audit activity and were able to demonstrate improvements to patient care as a result of this.
  • The majority of patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect.
  • Urgent appointments were usually available on the day they were requested.
  • The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity, which were reviewed and updated regularly
  • The practice had proactively sought feedback from patients and had an active patient participation group.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • The practice was aware of patient dissatisfaction in respect of the appointment system and access to appointments but were taking steps to try and improve.
  • The practice had effective systems in place to support patients with long term conditions. They offered an in house type 2 diabetes insulin initiation service and ensured that patients undergoing initiation were given the mobile phone number for the lead GP for diabetes.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly, the provider should:

  • Carry out annual fire evacuation drills
  • Carry out a risk assessment documenting why it has not been felt necessary for all non-clinical staff to undertake Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks)
  • Obtain suitable references for all newly appointed staff prior to commencement of employment
  • Comply with their own procedure in respect of cleaning/replacing privacy curtains in consultation rooms
  • Safely secure cord/chain mechanisms on vertical blinds to reduce the risk of accidental choking for small children.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

28 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spent time observing the way the practice worked and spoke to patients and staff. We spoke with five patients, all felt they could and would recommend the practice, even where they voiced frustrations/issues.

One person told us 'I can't really fault the place' Another person said 'The staff are all pleasant'. Generally we found that patients felt that the general practitioners (GPs) and nurses explained things well to them and listened. They also felt they were given choices about treatment options.

We saw the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse from happening. The practice was clean and had the appropriate standards of cleanliness. There were systems in place to identify, monitor and manage risks to those using, working in or visiting the service.

We found that the provider had an effective system in place to monitor when training was needed or was due for renewal. Staff were properly supported through basic training and appraisals to perform their roles.