• Doctor
  • GP practice

Abbeyslade PMS - Dr Chand Also known as Basildon Rd Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

111 Basildon Road, Abbey Wood, London, SE2 0ER (020) 8311 3917

Provided and run by:
Abbeyslade PMS - Dr Chand

All Inspections

9 June 2022

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Abbeyslade PMS - Dr Chand on 9 June 2022. 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 Abbeyslade PMS - Dr Chand, you can give feedback on this service.

4 March 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Abbeyslade PMS - Dr Chand on 4 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.

18 December 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Abbeyslade PMS – Dr Chand also known as Basildon Road Surgery on 18 November 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At the last inspection on 11 April 2018 we rated the practice as requires improvement overall because:

  • We found the practice failing to provide care and treatment in a safe way for service users
  • The practice nurse had not undertaken the required mandatory training for persons deployed in her role.
  • Staff were not aware of the designated fire marshals, safeguarding and infection control leads within the practice.
  • Arrangements were not in place to ensure end of life patients received co-ordinated care, including the involvement of family members and the palliative care
  • team.

At this inspection, we found that the provider had satisfactorily addressed these areas.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service 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.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

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

  • Improve the waiting times and available appointments for patients within the practice.
  • Explore ways to gather the feedback of all patients who use the practice.
  • Explore with reception staff, ways to ensure patient privacy and dignity is maintained at the reception desk.

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

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

11 April 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Requires Improvement overall. (Previous inspection 14 January 2016 – Good overall, requires improvement for Well Led)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires Improvement

Are services effective? – Requires Improvement

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Requires Improvement

We carried out an announced comprehensive focused inspection at Abbeyslade PMS – Dr Chand on 11 April 2018 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was carried out in line with our next phase inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice did not have clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. For example, we found that the practice had not followed its cold-chain policy or national guidelines on the management of vaccines.
  • There was evidence that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence-based guidelines. However, arrangements in place to formally review the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided was not consistent.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • The practice offered a flexible range of appointments and services.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on. There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. There were regular clinical meetings which were well documented.
  • There was a lack of governance arrangements to ensure that quality assurance processes were in place which led to improvements in patient outcomes.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.
  • Ensure that persons employed at the practice have received appropriate training.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review systems in place to increase the uptake of all standard childhood immunisations and cervical screening.
  • Continue to take steps to improve practice waiting times during surgery.
  • Consider ways to increase the number of elderly patients on the palliative care list and improve partnership working with the local palliative care team.
  • Review the process aimed at identifying patients with caring responsibilities to be able to provide appropriate support and signposting.

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

14 January 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Abbeyslade PMS – Dr Chand on 14 January 2016. 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:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed but not always well managed in relation to fire safety procedures, recruitment processes and emergency medicines and equipment.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance; however performance relating to diabetes and mental health were below local clinical commissioning group and national averages. There was evidence that the practice worked with multi-disciplinary health professionals, but there was no evidence of multi-disciplinary team meetings.
  • Results from the national patient survey published in January 2016 showed the practice received mostly below average scores for consultations with doctors; however patients we spoke with said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Responses from the national GP survey showed several patients were not able to get an appointment when they needed one. Patients told us they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

  • The practice was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. There were good facilities for wheelchair users but there were no baby changing facilities. Patients did not have the choice of seeing a female GP.

  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on. There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. There were regular clinical meetings; however there was little documented evidence of governance meetings.

There are areas where the provider should make improvements. The provider should:

  • Review the need for a defibrillator and review the risk assessment in relation to this, ensure non-clinical staff receive scheduled basic life support training and annual fire drills are conducted.

  • Ensure it continually monitors feedback from patients and clinical performance, and improvements are implemented where appropriate.

  • Ensure recruitment arrangements include two references for all staff in accordance with the practice’s recruitment policy.

  • Ensure regular practice governance and multi-disciplinary team meetings take place and these are documented.

  • Review arrangements for patients to have a choice of seeing a female GP.

  • Consider displaying information for carers.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice