• Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice Also known as Hornspit Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Hornspit Medical Centre, Hornspit Lane, Liverpool, Merseyside, L12 5LT (0151) 256 5755

Provided and run by:
Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice 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 Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

05 May 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We have carried out an announced remote review for Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice at Hornspit Medical Centre, Hornspit Lane, Liverpool L12 5LT. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Following our previous inspection on 10 September 2019, the practice was rated Good overall and for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive services. However, Well Led services were rated as Requires Improvement.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this review.

This review was a focused follow-up without undertaking a site visit. The purpose of the review was to review the regulatory breach identified at the practice last inspection as follows:

  • Regulation 16 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Receiving and acting on complaints.

The provider did not have an effective system for handling and responding to complaints. The regulation was not being met because the provider did not inform patients of the steps to take if they were not satisfied with the findings or investigation outcomes. This included their right to refer the matter to the Health Service Ombudsman.

We also reviewed the area where the provider should make an improvement by:

  • Ensuring the availability of equipment in the practice to manage medical emergencies taking into account the guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK).

How we carried out the review

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. For this review we have requested evidence from the provider to ensure the breaches in regulations identified at the last inspection have been met.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found during the review
  • 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 Well Led services.

We found that:

  • The practice had reviewed the complaints processes and information provided to patients on how to complain and response letters sent to complainants, now included information of the actions they could take if they were not satisfied with the investigation outcomes.

  • The practice had set up a contract for the supply of oxygen to be used in an emergency. The practice provided evidence to show they had appropriate equipment in place to respond to medical emergencies.

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 September 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice on 10 September 2019. We carried out an inspection of this service due to the length of time since the last inspection. Following our review of the information available to us, including information provided by the practice, we focused our inspection on the following key questions:

  • Effective
  • Well Led

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 rated the practice as Good for providing effective services because:

  • Patients’ needs were assessed, and care and treatment was delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance, supported by clear pathways and tools.
  • The practice had a programme of quality improvement activity in place and they routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care, support and treatment.
  • Care was delivered and reviewed in a coordinated way when different teams, services or organisations were involved.
  • The practice identified patients who may need extra support and directed them to relevant services. This included good support to the various population groups reviewed during this inspection.

We rated the practice as Requires Improvement for providing well-led services because:

  • The provider did not have an effective system for handling and responding to complaints by patients and and other members of the public.

The areas where the provider must make improvements:

  • Ensure there is an effective system for handling and responding to complaints by patients and other persons in relation to the carrying on of the regulated activity.

(Please see the specific details on action required at the end of this report).

The areas where the provider should make improvements:

  • Review the availability of equipment in the practice to manage medical emergencies taking into account the guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK).

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

9 October 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This is the report of findings from our inspection of Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice. Our comprehensive inspection was a planned inspection, which took place on 9 October 2014.

The Dr J Pramanik & Dr J T Pramanik Practice, also known as Hornspit Medical Centre, operates from purpose built premises which opened in 1994. It is located in the heart of a residential community and serves just over 3000 patients.

Patients told us that they were very satisfied with the services they received and spoke very highly about the health care clinicians treating them.

We have rated this service overall as good.

Our key findings were as follows: The service was patient centred in this small family run, well established practice. Patients felt supported and had confidence in the clinicians. The practice demonstrated a track record of seeking to provide safe and improving services in clean facilities to an inner city community with complex needs and health challenges, including a high incidence of limiting long term illness. It was seeking to improve access to appointments and improve the health and wellbeing of its community.

In addition the provider should:

  • Continue to explore improving surgery opening hours and the opportunities for early evening appointments.
  • Consider GP training in Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards to support their on-going professional development.
  • Consider the introduction of a patient participation group or enhanced local patient surveys.
  • Although serious medical emergencies in practice are rare and the practice is situated very close to A&E departments (there are three A&E departments within a three mile radius), it would be best practice to have oxygen available and a revised medical emergencies protocol.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice