The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

New Court Surgery Also known as New Court Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Prospect View, 300 Pickersleigh Road, Malvern, Worcestershire, WR14 2GP (01684) 573161

Provided and run by:
New Court Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about New Court Surgery 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 New Court Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

25 March 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about New Court Surgery on 25 March 2020. 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.

4 Dec 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating 12/05/2015 – Good)

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 Dr. S.D. Roberts and Partners on 4 December 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines and best practice.
  • There were comprehensive policies and procedures to support best practice.
  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for recording, reporting and learning from significant events. The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • There was clearly defined and embedded systems, processes and practices in place to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse and for identifying and mitigating risks of health and safety.
  • There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support effective governance.
  • The practice worked proactively with other organisations to ensure patients had access to a range of services to support their health and wellbeing.
  • Staff involved treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • The practice responded to complaints in a timely and open manner.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • All of the 18 patient comment cards and feedback on NHS website were positive about the timely access and quality of care patients received.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

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

12 May 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr S D Roberts and Partners on 12 May 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Please note that when referring to information throughout this report, for example any reference to the Quality and Outcomes Framework data, this relates to the most recent information available to the CQC at that time.

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.
  • Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand
  • 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 virtual Patient Participation Group (PPG).
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • The practice had a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority.
  • 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.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

18 September 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with six patients and seven members of staff.

When patients received care or treatment they were asked for their consent and their wishes were listened to. One patient told us: "The doctor explained everything, giving consent was not a problem because I understood why I needed it". We found that when minor surgery had been carried out the doctor had obtained written consent from patients before the surgery had commenced.

We saw that patients' views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and that they were treated with dignity and respect. The patients we spoke with provided positive feedback about their care. Patients' commented: "The care is very good". And "It's excellent". Patients received their medicines when they needed them and their medicines were regularly reviewed.

Staff had received training in safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. They were aware of the appropriate agencies to refer safeguarding concerns to that ensured patients were protected from harm.

The modern purpose built premises were well maintained and clean. This protected patients from risks of infection.

The provider had systems in place for monitoring the quality of service provision. There was an established system for regularly obtaining opinions from patients about the standards of the services they received. This meant that on-going improvements could be made by the practice staff.