• Doctor
  • GP practice

St Marys Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

St Marys Surgery, Church Close, Andover, Hampshire, SP10 1DP (01264) 361424

Provided and run by:
St Marys Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about St Marys Surgery 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 St Marys Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

31 December 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about St Marys Surgery on 31 December 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

10 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 Dr Stone & Partners on 14 June 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the June 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Stone & Partners on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 10 May 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 on 16 June 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now rated as Good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Policies within the practice had been updated and risk assessments had been reviewed and actioned.

  • All staff were trained in safeguarding training to the correct level for their role.

  • There was a well-planned cleaning schedule with a cleanliness check system for the entire practice building.

  • There was a clear and informative training matrix for all staff.

  • Clinical improvements had been evidenced in the last year, including the undertaking of several audits that had led to better processes in the care given.

  • The data showed that the practice now compared favourably for outcomes in most clinical areas when compared to national and local averages.

  • The practice now routinely offered a translation service to all new patients as required.

  • Complaints were followed up by the practice in order to understand if further learning or improvements could be implemented.

  • The practice had introduced a social media page.This enabled younger patients to receive information regarding the practice and for the practice to be able to reach this patient group more effectively.

    In addition the practice should:

  • Continue to support patients with learning disabilities to attend for annual health checks with the practice or other services

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

14 June 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Stone & Partners on 14 June 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

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 well managed with the exception of recording of cleaning checks in line with the practices infection control policy and ensuring that oxygen masks were sealed and unused.
  • 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.
  • The majority of 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.

We saw an area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice worked closely with local organisations in the community to provide enhanced support for its patients. For example, the practice registered all patients from the local crisis centre and homeless refuge as temporary patients. Patients from the crisis centre were seen as an urgent appointment on the day they registered and then contacted again by the practice to arrange further appointments as necessary. One of the GPs attended regular multi-disciplinary meetings with the community mental health team to discuss patients registered at the practice who had a dual diagnosis of mental health and substance misuse problems. The GP ran a substance misuse programme for patients in the community and had completed additional training to prescribe to patients who were undergoing treatment programmes for their addictions.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure all staff receive safeguarding training to the level appropriate for their role and ensure this is recorded.

  • Ensure a Legionella risk assessment has been completed and an action plan in place to evidence timescales of implementation following recommendations.

  • Review current systems to support a regular programme of audit and clinical improvement.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice