You are here

Sandy Health Centre Medical Practice Good

We are carrying out a review of quality at Sandy Health Centre Medical Practice. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 12 January 2021

The service is rated as Good overall.

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Sandy Health Centre Medical Practice on 3 February 2020. The overall rating for the practice was inadequate, it was placed into special measures and warning notices were issued.

The full comprehensive report of the February 2019 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Sandy Health Centre Medical Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering how we carried out this inspection. We therefore undertook some of the inspection processes remotely and spent less time on site. We conducted staff interviews on 24 to 26 November and carried out a site visit on 25 November 2020.

Our judgement of the quality of care at this service is based on a combination of what we found when we inspected, information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

The practice is rated as good overall.

(previously rated as inadequate in February 2020)

We rated the practice as good for providing safe service because:

  • The governance around medicines management had improved and there were effective systems to manage patients with medicines that required additional monitoring.
  • We found a small number of patients where the documentation regarding safety alerts lacked detail. We noted that this was regarding documentation for low risk patients.
  • Medicine reviews were taking place for patients on repeat medicines however, documentation for these reviews required more detail.
  • The process had appropriate recruitment systems in place and had improved oversight of advanced clinical practitioners.
  • Systems to ensure Infection Prevention and Control were effective and additional safety measures had been put in place in light of the COVID-19 pandemic.

We rated the practice as good for providing effective service because:

  • Hypnotic prescrbing was in line with local and national averages.
  • Patients with atrial fibrillation were assessed for the risk of stroke and treated appropriately.
  • The practice maintained oversight of staff training needs. All staff had completed the mandatory training as determined by the practice.
  • All staff had received an appraisal in the last twelve months. Staff told us these meetings were supportive and productive.

We rated the practice as good for providing caring service because:

  • The National GP Patient Survey results for caring indicators were in line with local and national indicators.
  • Patients told us that staff treated them with care and compassion.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing responsive service because:

  • National GP Patient Survey results in relation to telephone access were significantly below local and national averages however, patients gave positive feedback regarding access during the inspection.
  • The practice had a clear action plan to improve patient satisfaction in this area, including the installation of a new telephone system in the weeks following the inspection.
  • These concerns affected all of the population groups and therefore they have all been rated as requires improvement.

We rated the practice as good for providing well-led service because:

  • The practice maintained appropriate oversight of health and safety, infection prevention and control, medicines management and staffing.
  • The practice had discussed areas of poor patient feedback and had taken actions to improve this.
  • The practice had a clear business strategy to ensure practice improvement that was developed in line with staff and patient feedback.
  • Staff told us there was a culture of support and they were able to raise concerns confidently.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue to improve documentation regarding safety alerts and medicine reviews.
  • Continue to improve cervical screening uptake.
  • Continue to complete the backlog of patient records requiring summarising.
  • Continue to ensure appropriate oversight of water temperature checks to mitigate the risk of legionella.
  • Continue to improve patient satisfaction in relation to telephone access.

I am taking this service out of special measures. This recognises the significant improvements that have been made to the quality of care provided by this service.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BS BM BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 12 January 2021

Effective

Good

Updated 12 January 2021

Caring

Good

Updated 12 January 2021

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021

Well-led

Good

Updated 12 January 2021

Checks on specific services

People with long term conditions

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021

Families, children and young people

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021

Older people

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021

Working age people (including those recently retired and students)

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia)

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable

Requires improvement

Updated 12 January 2021