The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr Shapiro & Partners Also known as Wood Lane Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Medical Centre, 2a Wood Lane, Ruislip, Middlesex, HA4 6ER (01895) 632677

Provided and run by:
Dr Shapiro & Partners

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr Shapiro & Partners 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 Dr Shapiro & Partners, you can give feedback on this service.

23 July 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Shapiro & Partners on 23 July 2019 as part of our inspection programme. It was also to follow up on breaches of regulations identified at a previous inspection on 19 June 2018.

At the last inspection we rated the practice as requiring improvement overall and requiring improvement for providing safe and well-led services because care and treatment was not provided in a safe way to patients and the practice needed to ensure that effective systems and processes were established to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

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 for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services. The practice is also rated good for all population groups.

We rated the practice as good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led services because:

  • 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 practice could demonstrate good patient outcomes were delivered.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • Staff treated patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care. The practice ethos was to provide an accessible and approachable patient-orientated service.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care. Leaders had the capacity and skills to deliver high-quality, sustainable care. They had a shared purpose, strived to deliver and motivated staff to succeed.
  • Feedback from patients who used the service, those close to them and external stakeholders was positive about the way staff cared for patients.
  • Staff told us they felt supported and engaged with managers and there was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

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

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

19 June 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as requires improvement overall. (Previous rating 10/2015 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Requires improvement

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Shapiro & Partners on 19 June 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had 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.
  • The practice had some systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines. However, improvements in monitoring fridge temperatures, patients on lithium, safety alerts and uncollected repeat prescriptions were required.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. Although, clinical audit was not used to assess the quality of care and outcomes for patients.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Most patients found the appointment system easy to use and could access care when they needed it, although some patients reported difficulties accessing the practice via telephone and getting an appointment with the GP of their choice. The practice was acting to improve telephone access.
  • The practice reviewed data from the Friends and Family test. However, they did not proactively engage and involve patients and the patient participation group to support good quality sustainable services.
  • There was a focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation. However, there was a lack of management oversight in managing risks relating to medicines management.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations 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.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review and improve clinical staff access to information on patients who may be at risk.
  • Improve the security of blank prescriptions stored in consulting rooms.
  • Review and improve reception staff training for their role in the management of patients with severe infections, and clinical staff training in consent to care and treatment.
  • Implement continuous clinical audit to assess and monitor the quality of care and outcomes for patients.
  • Develop supporting business plans to achieve practice priorities and share the vision with staff.

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

28 October 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Shapiro and Partners (also known as Wood Lane Medical Centre) on 28 October 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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. All significant events and incidents were discussed at practice meetings, although we found some clinical incidents were not always recorded and investigated as a significant event.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • Recruitment checks had been carried out prior to employment, although we found that the GP partners had not received a disclosure and barring service check (DBS).

  • 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.
  • Most patients said 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.
  • 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.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

In addition the provider should:

  • Complete annual infection prevention and control audits.

  • Carry out a legionella risk assessment.

  • Review national guidance relating to annual basic life support training for non-clinical staff.

  • Review protocols for including patient consent in the patient record.

  • Advertise that translation services are available to patients on request.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice