The Argyle Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment in September 2016, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment in June 2026, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 72 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The practice is an accredited training practice and 2 of the partners are also GP appraisers. They had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

People felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding. Managers encouraged staff to raise concerns when things went wrong. During staff meetings, the whole team discussed and learnt from clinical issues. There were daily huddles at the practice and staff feedback about the huddles was positive. Staff felt there was an open culture, and that safety was a top priority. The practice had processes for staff to report incidents, near misses and safety events. There was a system to record and investigate complaints, and when things went wrong, staff apologised and gave people support. Learning from incidents and complaints resulted in changes that improved care for others.

The practice worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

There were systems in place for processing information relating to new patients. The service worked with other providers to deliver shared care and when patients moved between services. Referrals and test results were managed in a timely way.

The practice worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Staff explained they had a system to follow up with children who were not brought to appointments and followed up those that attended A and E.

Safeguarding policies were in place and known to staff, who were appropriately trained in safeguarding procedures. The practice maintained a list of vulnerable people and acted on concerns working in partnership with other organisations. However, we found that alerts on some household members were not always consistent for patients who were on the safeguarding register. Leaders took prompt action to rectify this and in addition provided a safeguarding audit that reflected updates for those on the safeguarding register and the household members updated.

The practice worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Emergency equipment was available and maintained. Staff could recognise a deteriorating patient and knew of action to take. Patients were advised on risks related to their condition and actions to take if their condition deteriorated.

The practice detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Contracts were in place to ensure the premises were maintained. Health and safety risk assessments and audits had been undertaken and risks identified had been addressed. There was a business continuity plan in place which was monitored and regularly reviewed.

The practice made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. There was evidence the service upskilled staff to create additional capacity, skills and experience to meet the needs of patients and create a more flexible workforce. For example, the receptionist had received training and support to progress to a healthcare assistant and phlebotomist.

There were a range of clinical and non-clinical roles within the practice. We found training was up to date, learning needs and development of staff was managed appropriately, and staff were working within their agreed areas of competence. Safe recruitment practices were followed.

Staff felt there was an open culture, and confirmed they had daily, weekly and monthly meetings where they discussed incidents and learning. Staff survey results were positive about the practice as place of work.

The practice ensured that facilities and equipment were safe, and that equipment was maintained according to manufacturers’ instructions. They assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The practice had a designated infection, prevention and control lead and all staff had had relevant training. Cleaning schedules were in place and followed. Risk assessments and audits were completed, and actions taken to mitigate risks.

The practice made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Staff involved people in reviews of their medicines and helped them understand how to manage their medicines safely. People knew what to do and who to contact if their condition did not improve or they experienced any unexpected symptoms. Staff received regular training, were competency assessed on medicines optimisation, and felt confident managing the storage, administration and recording of medicines. Staff managed prescription stationery appropriately and securely. Staff usually followed protocols to ensure they prescribed all medicines safely, and ensured people received all recommended medicines reviews and monitoring. The clinical records we reviewed demonstrated that care was provided in line with current guidance. For example, a sample of 5 patient records were looked at for medication reviews, and these were found to be comprehensive. Similarly, no issues were identified in the patient records we reviewed, including those prescribed higher risk medicines. The practice is one of 3 hubs in the borough for supporting substance misuse patients.

Medicines including vaccines were stored securely and at appropriate temperatures. Staff regularly checked the stock levels and expiry dates for all medicines, including emergency medicines and vaccines. Waste medicines were recorded and disposed of appropriately including medicines returned by patients. Staff stored medical gases, such as oxygen, safely and completed required safety risk assessments. The practice had effective systems to manage and respond to safety alerts and medicine recalls. Staff followed established processes to ensure people prescribed medicines with specific risks received recommended monitoring. There was a programme of regular clinical audits of prescribing that focused on improving care and treatment.