New Cross Health Centre

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, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service 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. Staff gave examples of significant events they had either been directly involved in, or that had been discussed in practice meetings. We were given examples where learning had been identified, shared and embedded within practice processes. This was supported by meeting minutes, which demonstrated that significant events were discussed with the practice team. There were processes for staff to report incidents and staff told us they felt supported to speak up and raise concerns.

The service 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 service 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. 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. Safeguarding was a standard agenda item in clinical meetings where concerns were discussed. Staff knew who the practice safeguarding lead and deputy leads were and had undertaken appropriate training to give them the knowledge to know when and how to raise concerns.

The service 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 service 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 reviewed.

The service 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 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.

The service 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 service 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 took steps to ensure they prescribed medicines appropriately to optimise care outcomes, including antibiotics. Prescribing data reviewed as part of our assessment confirmed this. For example, the overall volume of antibiotics prescribed (taking into account the size of the practice and mix of ages and gender) was lower than local and national averages.

Staff regularly checked the stock levels and expiry dates for all medicines, including emergency medicines, vaccines, and controlled drugs. Staff stored medical gases, such as oxygen, safely and completed required safety risk assessments.

The provider had effective systems to manage and respond to safety alerts and medicine recalls.

We carried out remote clinical searches on the practice’s clinical system. Staff followed protocols to ensure they prescribed all medicines safely, and ensured people received all recommended medicines reviews and monitoring.

We reviewed 5 patients identified as having a potential missed diagnosis of diabetes. We found 1 of these patients had a missed diagnosis of diabetes. This patient had 2 blood tests that would usually indicate diabetes; however the patient had not been coded as such. We shared our findings with the provider who told us they would review this patient and code accordingly.

We reviewed 5 patients who had received medication reviews in the last 3 months. Two of these reviews did not contain sufficient details of the review. We shared our findings with the provider who told us they would review these patients and remind all clinicians undertaking reviews of the need to include sufficient information to accompany medication reviews.