The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Spring Hill Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Phil Collins Way, Arley, Coventry, West Midlands, CV7 8FD (01676) 540454

Provided and run by:
Spring Hill Medical Centre

All Inspections

4 October 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive at Spring Hill Medical Centre on 4 October 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Safe - requires improvement

Effective - good

Caring - good

Responsive - good

Well-led - good

Following our previous inspection on 19 December 2017 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 Spring Hill Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection to follow up concerns reported to us.

  • Key questions inspected are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

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.

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:

  • Patients mainly received effective care and treatment that met their needs. Processes were in place to monitor patients’ health in relation to the use of medicines including high risk medicines. However, we found some patients were overdue a review.
  • Patients generally received appropriate long-term condition reviews. We found some patients diagnosed with asthma needed further monitoring.
  • Safety alerts were received by the practice. A review of the patient record system found some patients required a review when prescribed a combination of medicines and advice regarding side effects of medicines was required. The practice immediately contacted these patients and invited them in for a review.
  • The published childhood immunisation data showed the practice had exceeded the 95% target set by the World Health Organisation for three immunisations. The practice were below the 90% minimum target for the percentage of children aged 5 who have received immunisation for measles, mumps and rubella. The practice had completed an audit of the eligible patients and put actions in place to increase the uptake.
  • The published cervical cancer screening showed that the practice had not met the target of 80% set by the UK Health and Security Agency. The practice had taken actions to improve the uptake of cervical screening.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care. Feedback from patients on the NHS Website had improved over the previous 12 months.
  • The practice had taken actions to ensure patients could access care and treatment in a timely way. This included changes to the telephone system and a capacity and demand analysis. Staff were provided with information to improve the handling of patient requests.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care. However, we found areas where clinical oversight was not carried out effectively; which impacted on areas such as medicines management and effective monitoring of some patients diagnosed with a long-term condition

We found one breach of regulations. The provider must:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue to take measures to improve the uptake of childhood immunisations and cervical screening.
  • Review the processes in place to monitor patients diagnosed with asthma.
  • Continue to take actions to improve patient satisfaction.

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

19 December 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Spring Hill Medical Centre on 19 December 2017 as part of our inspection programme. The practice was previously inspected on 10 February 2015 and was rated as Good.

At the latestinspection we found:

  • Urgent same day patient appointments were available when needed. All patients we spoke with and those who completed comment cards before our inspection said they were always able to obtain same day appointments and access care when needed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care delivered in line with current guidelines. Staff had the appropriate skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey revealed a high level of patient satisfaction about the care given at the practice. For example, 94% of patients who responded said the last GP they saw or spoke to was good at treating them with care and concern and 98% had confidence and trust in the last GP they saw or spoke to.

  • 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.

  • Patients said GPs gave them enough time and treated them with dignity and respect.

  • A business plan was in place for 2017-2019 which set key targets for quality, staffing and finance.

  • The practice leadership focussed on ensuring that all staff understood who important they were to the practice and also ensured staff had an effective work/life balance.

  • Located in an area with larger elderly population, the practice had identified 280 patients as carers (just under 8% of the practice list).

  • The practice has a trained care navigator and was part of a pilot for Age UK.

However there were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:

  • Continue to implement and monitor actions to improve areas highlighted as below the average in the annual national GP patient survey, particularly in the area of access to care and treatment.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

10 February 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Springhill Medical Centre on 10 February 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led services. It was also good for providing services for patients across all age ranges and to patients with varied needs due to their health or social circumstances.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice had systems for monitoring and maintaining the safety of the practice and the care and treatment they provided to their patients.
  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses.
  • The practice was clean and hygienic and had arrangements for reducing the risks from healthcare associated infections.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and the practice planned and delivered care following best practice guidance.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • The practice had introduced ways to assist patients with the highest level of need to receive care quickly and easily.
  • The practice had a well-established and well trained team with expertise and experience in a range of health conditions.
  • Patients said that staff were compassionate, supportive, friendly and understanding.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. The practice responded to complaints in a positive way.
  • The practice communicated with patients and acted on feedback to improve the service they provided.
  • The practice had recognised that internal communication processes was an area which they needed to develop and improve.

We saw the following area of outstanding practice

  • The practice had introduced a system that they had called 'Purple patients' to assist patients with cancer, autism, significant incapacity and those using oxygen to obtain prompt appointments. The scheme was introduced to take into account of the particular needs of those patients. This included the specific risk of infection for cancer patients during periods of receiving chemotherapy. The scheme involved patients being flagged on the practice computer system as ‘purple patients’. The practice had made a commitment that these patients could expect continuity of care by seeing the same GP for their appointments. The practice also provided same day appointments for them and as far as possible accommodated their preferred time. ‘Purple patients’ or their carers could also be offered a side room to wait in until their GP called them if their circumstances made this necessary.

There were also areas where the practice needs to make improvements

The practice should –

  • Review its recruitment policy and procedures to make sure these include all necessary employment checks for all staff.
  • Review opportunities for the practice team to share information about the practice’s vision and strategy and to share learning from significant events and complaints.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice