Sidley Medical Practice Also known as Dr Lawton & Partners

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

At a previous assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has changed to inadequate. We identified breaches of the regulations.

There were not established and effective systems in place to ensure people received timely and appropriate assessments. Staff had not been trained, supervised or supported to ensure people who needed care received it. Systems were not established to ensure individual clinical practice was safe and effective. The provider had not ensured staff had opportunities to identify, share and embed best practice to improve the service people received.

Staff did not have access to accurate records to support care planning and review of people’s needs. We found delays in reviewing test results and documentation placing patients at risk of harm.

Systems were not in place to promote and support staff to work with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving between services.

This service scored 33 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There were not established and effective systems and processes in place to assess, prioritise and review people’s care. Non clinical staff had not been trained or had access to guidance or supervision to assist them to triage patients effectively. This meant there were no assurances that patients were directed to the most appropriate pathway for their health concerns.

We found some patient records were not appropriately coded and flagged to alert staff to individual clinical needs and preferences.

There were no established and effective systems in place to identify, share and embed best practice. The provider had not monitored individual clinician’s work to ensure they were safe and effective. Clinical staff did not receive regular formal supervision to ensure their decisions were reflective of national legislation, evidence-based good practice and required standards. Regular management meetings were not held.

There were no established and effective systems in place to identify, share and embed best practice. The provider had not monitored individual clinician’s work to ensure they were safe and effective. Clinical staff did not receive regular formal supervision to ensure their decisions were reflective of national legislation, evidence-based good practice and required standards. Regular management meetings were not held.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

There were not established and effective systems in place to ensure peoples care needs were monitored effectively. We found delays in tests results and documents being reviewed and actioned, and delays in referrals being managed placing people at risk of harm.

There were not established and effective systems in place to ensure clinicians knew who to obtain the appropriate consent from for children in care. The lack of up to date information in patient records meant legal guardians were not always identifiable. This meant there was no assurance that parental or best interest decisions could be made with the most appropriate adult and that the child’s interests were protected. The practice had not monitored this.