The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Old Henry Street Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Old Henry Street Medical Centre, Henry Street, Leigh, Lancashire, WN7 2PG (01942) 605506

Provided and run by:
Old Henry Street Medical Centre

All Inspections

5 July 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We previously carried out an inspection at Old Henry Street Medical Centre on 2 August 2022. The practice was rated as good overall with the following key question ratings:

Safe – Requires Improvement

Effective -Good (rating awarded at the inspection 2 August 2022).

Caring – Good (rating awarded at the inspection 8 February 2018).

Responsive – Good (rating awarded at the inspection 8 February 2018)

Well-led -Good (rating awarded at the inspection 2 August 2022).

At this focussed inspection, on 5 July 2023, we found that improvements had been made and the key question safe has been rated good. The overall rating remains good.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Old Henry Street Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection to follow up breaches of regulation from a previous inspection in line with our inspection priorities. At the inspection on 2 August 2022 the key question of safe had been rated requires improvement. The system for ensuring patients had the required monitoring when prescribed certain medicines was not fully effective. Not all Ardens alerts had been actioned.

How we carried out the inspection

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:

  • the practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.

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 Health Care

02 August 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at Old Henry Street Medical Centre on 2 August 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good overall with the following key question ratings:

Safe – Requires Improvement

Effective -Good

Caring – Good (rating awarded at the inspection 8 February 2018).

Responsive – Good (rating awarded at the inspection 8 February 2018)

Well-led -Good

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Old Henry Street Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach. This inspection was a focused inspection looking at the key questions Safe, Effective and Well-led.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This inspection included:

  • A site visit by the lead inspector.
  • Conducting staff interviews remotely and on site.
  • Completing clinical searches remotely on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider.
  • Reviewing patient records remotely to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • Gaining feedback from staff by using staff questionnaires.

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 have rated this practice as Good overall

We rated the practice requires improvement for providing safe services:

  • The system for ensuring patients had the required monitoring when prescribed certain medicines was not fully effective.
  • Some medicine reviews were overdue.
  • Ardens alerts were not always actioned.

We found in the key questions effective and well-led and from the historic ratings of caring and responsive that:

  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

We found one breach of regulation. The provider must:

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

In addition, the provider should:

  • Review the processes for routinely recording medicines reviews.

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

4 March 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out a focused inspection at Dr Wong and Partners on 4 March 2020. The announced inspection was part of our inspection programme. Following a Care Quality Commission annual regulatory review to check for changes in quality we inspected the key questions effective and well led. We used information from our previous inspection findings for the key questions safe, caring and responsive. The practice was previously inspected on 10 January 2018 and was rated good overall.

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 good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • 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.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.
  • Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

We rated the practice as good for providing effective services and good for the population groups because:

  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided.
  • It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence-based guidelines.
  • The practice understood the needs of its population and tailored services in response to those needs.

We rated the practice as good for providing a well led service because:

  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity and held regular governance meetings.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of person-centre care.
  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

10 January 2018

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection 20 November 2014 – Good)

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 Dr Wong and Partners on 10 January 2018 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. The inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At this inspection we found:

  • 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.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • 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.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had an active patient participation group (PPG) that worked in partnership with the practice and externally within the locality to influence positive change for the benefit of the patient population. It was representative of the wider patient population and assisted in delivering positive change in the practice.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review current systems and processes for the wider management of the long term condition diabetes.
  • Increase awareness of medical emergencies across the clinical team.
  • Standardise the prescribing processes associated with disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs).
  • Whilst there was evidence of audits taking place, the practice should consider developing a structured approach to quality improvement.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

20 November 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We inspected Dr Spielmann and Partners on the 20 November 2014 as part of our new comprehensive inspection programme. This was the practice’s first inspection by CQC under its new methodology.

We have rated the practice as good.

Comments we received from patients were positive about the care and treatment they had received. Patients told us they are treated with dignity and respect and involved in making decisions about their treatment options.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in care and treatment decisions.
  • The majority of patients reported good access to the practice and a named GP and continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns, and report incidents.
  • The practice is clean and well maintained.
  • There are a range of qualified staff to meet patients’ needs.
  • The practice works with other health and social care providers to achieve the best outcomes for patients.
  • The practice had an enthusiastic and dynamic patient participation group (PPG).

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice