The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Parkside Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Eastleigh Health Centre, Newtown Road, Eastleigh, Hampshire, SO50 9AG (023) 8061 2032

Provided and run by:
Parkside Practice

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

31 May 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Parkside Practice on 11 July 2016. The practice was rated good for effective, caring, responsive and well-led domains, and was rated requires improvement for the safe domain. The overall rating for the practice was good. The full comprehensive report on the July 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Parkside Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 31 May 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breach in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 11July 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

At our previous inspection on 11 July 2016, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services as the chaperone policy was not fully risk assessed by the practice. In addition, recruitment processes were lacking clearly documented evidence around records to demonstrate full former employment checks had been completed for all employees.

It was also noted on the previous inspection that the treatment room and medicines fridge were not always known to be securely locked. In addition the practice was advised that it should do more to increase support to patients with mental health needs.

Our key findings from our inspection on 31 May 2017:

  • The practice had now implemented comprehensive employment checks with relation to the employment of locum GPs and all new staff.
  • Staff had been risk assessed for chaperone duties and correctly trained.
  • There was an increase in security for medicines and confidential information.
  • Vulnerable mental health patients who were not attending for annual review (after three invitations to do so) were being personally telephoned by their named GP for welfare checks and invited again to attend the practice.
  • The practice had sought support from the local clinical commissioning group (CCG) and local medical committee (LMC) to assess and facilitate changes to the practice management. A new manager had been recruited to oversee these changes and to work with the practice to continue to improve the general management and structure of the practice.
  • The patient participation group was providing support to the patient engagement meetings facilitated by the CCG and was producing an informative quarterly newsletter for all patients.
  • The practice was proactively looking at new ways of working in the future with other local providers to improve patient care.
  • The practice was currently reviewing the appointment booking system in order to provide a greater balance between pre-bookable and open access appointments without the need to increase the staffing levels.
  • There was a targeted programme using social media to engage with younger patients and to keep them supplied with relevant health information.

The practice is now rated as good for providing safe services.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

11th July 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Parkside Practice on 11 July 2016. 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.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and were generally well managed. However, some staff employed since April 2013 did not have Disclosure and Baring Service (DBS) checks and were being used as chaperones. There was no record of a locums GMC registration number or references being taken up.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and 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.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure recruitment checks include all necessary employment checks and a complete record is maintained.

  • Staff that have the role of chaperone need a Disclosure and Baring Service (DBS) checks or a risk assessment explaining why this is not required. Where not required the correct procedures for the chaperone to follow must be reflected in the practice policy.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • The treatment room needs to be kept locked when not in use and the medicine fridge keys kept secure at all times.
  • The practice should increase the support provided to patients with mental health needs.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

19 November 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with eight patients, seven members of staff (including four GPs) and reviewed records in relation to four patients. The practice operated from two surgeries a few miles apart serving two communities totalling approximately 11,500 patients.

Patients were happy with the care provided. One patient told us that the GP had been 'very thorough' and another said; 'The doctor was lovely today.' Several commented that they had been advised by the GP to call back if they were concerned about anything.

There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. During our inspection we observed that the surgery was clean. We saw that offices and clinical rooms were clean, surfaces, trolleys and couches, curtains, curtain rails and the tops of cupboards were all clean.

Medicines which were stored on the premises were kept safely in a locked cabinet and audited on a monthly basis. The medicines which were required for doctors bags when visiting patients were checked monthly by the deputy practice manager to ensure they remained in date.

We reviewed staff files for two GPs employed by the practice. We saw proof that they were registered with the General Medical Council (GMC), had appropriate medical protection insurance and were on the primary medical performers list.

The practice reviewed the progress of the Quality Outcomes Framework (QOF) on a regular basis. The QOF gives an overall indication of the achievement of a practice through a points system. As a result a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) audit had been carried out. Measures logged before and after the audit showed that outcomes in every aspect of COPD care had improved.