The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Roxton Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Pilgrim Primary Care Centre, Immingham, Humberside, DN40 1JW (01469) 572058

Provided and run by:
The Roxton 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 The Roxton 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 The Roxton Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

22 November 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced focused inspection at The Roxton Practice on 20 – 22 November 2023. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Safe – Requires Improvement

Effective - Good

Caring – Not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection

Responsive - Good

Well-led - Good

Following our previous inspection on 16 July 2015 the practice was rated good overall and for all key questions

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Roxton Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities of inspecting GP practices that have not been inspected in over 8 years.

How we carried out the inspection/review

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit.
  • Staff questionnaires.

Our findings

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 found that:

  • The practice did not always provide care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm due to a lack of effective monitoring systems.
  • 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 had embedded systems in place to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
  • The senior management and leadership team ensured effective management at all levels to deliver high quality sustainable care.
  • The practice was digitally innovative and had screened over 12,000 patients to assess their digital literacy. Those deemed as high or advanced tech users were able to use an online portal to review long term conditions and encourage patients to manage their own health and wellbeing.
  • The practice worked closely with a local NHS Trust through the Connected Health Network which resulted in 60% fewer referrals for rheumatology than local primary care networks (PCN). They also used this network to reduce cardiology referrals from 18 months to 1 week.
  • 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:

  • Continue to monitor and improve the new processes in place to ensure patients documents are managed in a timely way.
  • Monitor new process in place to ensure appropriate medicine management and reviews for patients.
  • Take action to improve the uptake of eligible patients receiving cervical cancer screening.
  • Continue to assess access to the practice for patients, including more flexibility for patients when making an appointment.
  • Improve relationships with the patient participation group.

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

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Health Care

20 January 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Roxton practice on 20 January 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. It was good for providing services for the older population, families, children and young people and working age people. The practice was rated outstanding for people with long term conditions.

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. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • 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 about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • 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.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice provided an out of hours diabetes service to provide a more effective and responsive service to this group of patients. Patients can access the service, for example on an evening and weekend and by telephone, text and internet support.
  • Within the practice there was a Minor Injuries Unit (MIU). This unit was nurse led and offered assessment and treatment of minor injuries and illness to all in the local and surrounding area, including those patients who had been signposted from the NHS 111 service during surgery hours.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice