We carried out a review of the data available to us about Rye Medical Centre 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 Rye Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Rye Medical Centre on 8 September 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good but was rated as required improvements within the safe domain. The full comprehensive report on the September 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Rye Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Following this inspection the practice sent to us an action plan detailing what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to the following:
Additionally we had found that:
This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 1 March 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.
Our key findings were as follows:
Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Rye Medical Centre on 7 September 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
The areas where the provider must make improvement are:
The areas where the provider should make improvement are:
Chief Inspector of General Practice
During this inspection we spoke with six staff members which included two GPs, the practice manager, the dispensary manager, a practice nurse and a receptionist.
People were protected from abuse through the provision of staff training, the presence of clear policies and the availability of information to staff and people who used the service.
Since our last inspection, the provider had taken steps to ensure that appropriate systems were in place to manage medicines. An electronic stock control system had been introduced. Risks associated with the delivery of prescriptions to remote sites, for collection by patients, had been assessed.
We spoke with seven patients who had attended the practice on the day of the inspection, one of which was the chair of the patient participation group (PPG). We spoke with the practice manager, the principal GP, a GP partner, a practice nurse, a receptionist and an attending district nurse and the medicines dispensing manager.
Patient's feedback told us that they were happy with the care and service provided by the practice. One patient said, 'It is really lovely here I cannot speak too highly of the place.'
Patients told us that their privacy and dignity was well respected, they had time to discuss their health care issues, and had been fully involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.
We looked at the processes that the practice had in place to ensure the patients were protected from abuse. These processes had not ensured that all staff received appropriate training on all safeguarding issues.
We looked at the arrangements the practice had in place for medicine management. This included the practice followed by the dispensing staff. Patients told us that prescriptions were provided in a timely fashion and, when medicines were prescribed any possible side effects were discussed. However, we found that not all risks had been assessed to ensure the safe management of medicines at all times.
People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.
Staff told us that they had training and development opportunities and they were well supported by the provider. We saw evidence of training undertaken and planned training.