The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Park Medical Group

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Fawdon Park Road, Fawdon, Newcastle Upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE3 2PE (0191) 285 1763

Provided and run by:
The Park Medical Group

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 Park Medical Group 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 Park Medical Group, you can give feedback on this service.

2 and 7 December 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced focused inspection at The Park Medical Group on 2 and 7 December 2022. Overall, the practice is rated good.

Safe - Good
Effective - Good
Caring - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection.
Responsive - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection.
Well-led - Good

Following our previous inspection on 24 and 29 November 2021, the practice was rated requires improvement overall and for the key questions, was the practice safe, effective and well led. The key questions, was the practice responsive and caring, were both rated as good.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection to follow up concerns and breaches of regulation from a previous inspection.

The focus of the inspection was the key questions:

  • Safe
  • Effective
  • Well led
  • Also, the breaches of Regulation 17 HSCA (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 – Good Governance and Regulation 12 HSCA (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 Safe care and treatment.
  • We also followed up on the areas where we said they should make improvements in the previous inspection.

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.
  • Sending questionnaires to staff working in the practice.

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 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.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • The practice had acted upon the areas identified in the previous CQC inspection report and made good progress. The practice had used this as a driver for improvement.

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

  • Maintain a full record of staff vaccination status in line with current UK Health Security Agency guidance.
  • Improve the monitoring of blank prescriptions stored at the branch surgery, to support identification if any were lost or stolen.
  • Continue with identified improvements to the monitoring of patients prescribed lithium.
  • Put in place formal risk management arrangements.

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 Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

29 November 2021

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at The Park Medical Group on 29 November 2021. Overall, the practice is rated as requires improvement.

The ratings for each key question are:

Safe - Requires Improvement
Effective – Requires Improvement
Caring - Good
Responsive – Good
Well-led – Requires Improvement

Following our previous inspection on 25 February 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 Park Medical Group on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection carried out in response to concerns raised with us. We inspected all five key questions, is the practice safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider.
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit covering both the main surgery and branch.

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 have rated this practice as Requires Improvement overall

We have rated this practice as requires improvement overall, for being safe, effective and well-led because:

  • The systems for the appropriate and safe use of medicines, including medicines optimisation, were not always effective.
  • Patients’ needs were not always assessed, and care and treatment were not always delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance. The arrangements for call and recall of patients with long term conditions were not always effective and the clinical coding arrangements did not support the practice to identify and meet the needs of patients.
  • The practice was unable to fully demonstrate that staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • The practice did not always have clear and effective processes for managing risks, issues and performance. Some aspects of the practice governance systems were more informal and were not supported by auditable documented systems. This, given the pandemic, had made it difficult for the practice to maintain these systems.

We also found that:

  • The practice had clear systems, practices and processes to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.

We found two breaches of regulations. The provider must:

  • 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.

The provider should also:

  • Put in place formal risk management arrangements.
  • Put in place individual risk assessments to demonstrate why particular roles do not require Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks.
  • Review and improve the guidance for staff around managing conditions that may rapidly deteriorate to ensure any red flags are identified and documented and appropriate advice given to patients.
  • Continue to review and take action to improve cervical screening uptake.
  • Continue to implement the revised guidance on complaint handling.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

25 February 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Park Medical Group on 25 February 2015. The practice has two locations registered with CQC; Fawdon Park Road and Kingston Park Avenue. We visited both of these locations as part of the inspection. The practice was rated as good for all domains and population groups.

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. There were comprehensive safety systems in place.
  • 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.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment. Data showed that patients rated the practice higher than others for several aspects of care. We saw that staff were considerate with patients, treated them with understanding and maintained confidentiality.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients we spoke with and those who completed CQC comment cards indicated they felt they could obtain appointments, including urgent appointments, when needed. The practice operated a nurse practitioner triage system and a rapid access clinic. The practice were aware of the needs of the local population and there was good continuity of care.
  • 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 they acted on.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had continually monitored and audited the appointment system over several years to ensure that patients could obtain timely appointments with a GP which suited their needs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice