You are here

ICO Health Group - Chinbrook Surgery Good


Review carried out on 8 July 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about ICO Health Group - Chinbrook Surgery on 8 July 2021. 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 ICO Health Group - Chinbrook Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 21/02/2019

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall.

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at ICO Health Group on 21 February 2019 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008, as part of our regulatory functions. The inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At this inspection we found:

  • There was an effective system for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The practice’s systems, processes and practices helped to keep people safe.
  • Risks to patients, staff and visitors were assessed, monitored and managed in an effective manner.
  • Staff had the information they needed to deliver safe care and treatment to patients.
  • The arrangements for managing medicines in the practice helped keep patients safe.
  • The practice learned and made improvements when things went wrong.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients could access care and treatment from the practice within an acceptable timescale for their needs.
  • There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management locally and at provider management team level.
  • The practice had a vision to deliver high quality care and promote good outcomes for patients.
  • The practice was proactive at involving patients, the public, staff and external partners to support high-quality sustainable services.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Ensure that the fire alarm is tested by practice staff more frequently than the annual test currently being carried out by the servicing company.
  • Consider keeping all emergency medicines in one location.
  • Instigate a system that builds on the prescription security process already in place but which records the movement of prescriptions within the building.
  • Continue to monitor, improve and maintain the childhood immunisation uptake rates.
  • Review, monitor and improve cervical screening and bowel cancer screening uptake rates.
  • Consider ways to increase the uptake of care reviews with patients experiencing poor mental health and those with dementia.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Inspection carried out on 16 June 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at ICO Health Group on 16 June 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, responsive caring and well-led services. It was good at providing services for all the population groups including older people; long term conditions; mothers, babies, children and young people; the working age populations and those recently retired; people in vulnerable circumstances and people experiencing poor mental health.

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

•Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. All opportunities for learning from internal and external incidents were maximised. Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

•The practice used innovative and proactive methods to improve patient outcomes, working with other local providers to share best practice. Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.

•Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment. Information was provided to help patients understand the care available to them.

•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 (PPG).

•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.

•The practice had a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority. A business plan was in place, was monitored and regularly reviewed and discussed with all staff.

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

Importantly the provider should

•Ensure patients with long term conditions such as diabetes are offered opportunistic screening when they fail to attend regular checks.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice