The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Buckingham Road Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2&4 Buckingham Road, Harlesden, London, NW10 4RR (020) 8965 6078

Provided and run by:
Buckingham Road Surgery

All Inspections

16 August 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 on 12 May 2016 at Buckingham Road Surgery. The overall rating for the practice was good. However, the practice was rated as requires improvement for some aspects of providing safe services.

The full comprehensive report on the 12 May 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Buckingham Road Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 16 August 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out the improvements required that we identified in our previous inspection on 12 May 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Following this latest inspection the key question in relation to the provision of safe services at this location is now rated as good. The overall rating for the practice remains as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice had taken a systematic approach to review the findings of the 12 May 2016 inspection and we saw they had developed and implemented actions to rectify all areas that were recognised as requiring improvement.
  • The practice had resealed the impermeable flooring in its treatment rooms so that there was no longer a potential infection control risk.
  • The practice policy in relation to management of the cold chain had been reviewed and updated.  Staff we spoke with who were responsible for recording the daily fridge temperatures were aware of the process to take should the temperature range deviate outside the recommended +2 to 8°C. We found that all vaccines were in date. The practice had put a system in place to ensure that effective stock control was maintained.
  • The practice had reviewed its recruitment policy and implemented a recruitment check list to enable all required documents and checks to be in place for newly recruited and existing personnel. We reviewed nine personnel files and found that appropriate recruitment checks had been undertaken.
  • The practice had replaced the carpet in the waiting room and on the stairs. We observed that this was well fitted and no longer posed a trip hazard.
  • All the medicines for use in a medical emergency were in date and stored securely. We observed there was oxygen warning signage on the door where oxygen was stored.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

12 May 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Buckingham Road Surgery on 12 May 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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 but not all were well managed.
  • 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.
  • Where patient outcomes were low, we saw evidence that the practice was taking action to improve.
  • 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.
  • Most of the 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.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure recruitment arrangements include all necessary employment checks for all staff.

  • Ensure systems in place for recording and monitoring emergency medicines are effective.

  • Ensure the safe storage, monitoring and recording of all vaccines.

  • Ensure premises are maintained to mitigate the risks to people using the service.

In addition the provider should:

  • Ensure that all staff are issued a smartcard which they use to access patient records.

  • Review how the practice can maintain patient privacy at the reception desk.

  • Improve patient outcomes review approach for exception reporting.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 February 2014

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we spoke with three patients, the three GP partners, the practice manager and two receptionists. Patients we spoke with informed us that they had been well treated by staff. They expressed satisfaction with the care and treatment provided. One patient told us, "I have nothing but praise for the doctor I see. The doctor is very kind and very pleasant'. Another patient said, 'The staff at reception are very good. The doctor is understanding and willing to answer my questions'.

We examined the records of four patients. These contained details of assessments and their past medical history. Treatment and care provided were documented. Patients informed us that when necessary, their consent had been obtained. Reviews of treatment took place and there was a system for following up patients who had missed important monitoring appointments.

We saw certificates which indicated that staff had updated their professional knowledge and skills. The staff records contained essential employment checks carried out on staff. These included criminal record checks, evidence of identity and references. There were arrangements for new staff to be provided with a period of induction.

The practice had arrangements for safeguarding people from abuse. Staff were aware of action to take when responding to allegations or incidents of abuse. Safeguarding policies and procedures were in place.

The practice had a system of internal audits and checks to monitor the quality of service that patients received. Issues affecting the care of patients and the running of the practice had been discussed in Patient Participation Group (PPG) meetings. Complaints made had been responded to.