The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Vauxhall Primary Health Care

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Vauxhall Health Centre, Limekiln Lane, Liverpool, Merseyside, L5 8XR (0151) 295 3737

Provided and run by:
Vauxhall Primary Health Care

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Vauxhall Primary Health Care 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 Vauxhall Primary Health Care, you can give feedback on this service.

14 December 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Vauxhall Primary Health Care on 14 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.

2nd November 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (The practice was previously inspected on 28 April 2015 and rated good overall but required improvement for safe services. The follow up inspection on 17 November 2015, rated the practice as good for providing safe services and the overall rating was outstanding overall.)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? –Outstanding

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Vauxhall Primary Healthcare on 2 November 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice had access to equipment for use in medical emergencies but there was no formal written arrangement or oversight of the monitoring of this equipment.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines. In addition to routine services, alternative therapies such as acupuncture for chronic pain management and hypnosis for anxiety related conditions were provided.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they could access care when they needed it.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available from reception but not on display in the waiting room. This was rectified after our inspection. The practice sought patient and staff views about improvements that could be made to the service, including having a well- established patient forum group and acted on feedback.
  • Staff worked well together as a team and all felt supported to carry out their roles.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the practice.
  • The practice complied with the Duty of Candour.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice is situated in a very deprived area of Liverpool with very few community services in the area. The practice provided responsive services to the population. For example, the practice had worked with the Patient Forum to provide additional support to act as a community hub. In addition, the practice looked after the health needs of most of Liverpool’s travelling community; provided a weekly clinic at a local day centre for the homeless and worked in partnership with the local drug rehabilitation team to establish an additional drop in and recovery clinic for other addictions.

The provider should:

  • Have a monitoring system for the use of prescription forms for printers in the building.
  • Update the patient complaints information leaflet to detail who patients can complain to as an alternative to the practice.
  • Incorporate information about locums’ immunisation status in recruitment checks.
  • Have a system to monitor when checks related to the safety of the premises are due and ensure any action required is taken.

17th November 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this practice on 28th April 2015. A breach of legal requirements was found. After the comprehensive inspection, the practice wrote to us to say what they would do to meet legal requirements in relation to the breach.

We undertook this focused inspection to check that they had followed their plan and to confirm that they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Vauxhall Primary Health Care on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The recruitment records showed that the necessary checks had been undertaken to demonstrate the suitability of staff for their roles.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

28th April 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This is the report of findings from our inspection of Vauxhall Primary Health Care.

We undertook a comprehensive inspection on 28th April 2015. We spoke with patients, staff and the practice management team.

Overall, the practice was rated as Good. A caring, effective, responsive and well- led service was provided that met the needs of the population it served. We found elements of outstanding practice in relation to providing effective and responsive services. However, improvements were needed to demonstrate the practice was recruiting staff safely.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • There were systems in place to protect patients from avoidable harm, such as from the risks associated with medicines and infection control. However, improvements were needed to the recruitment of staff as the recruitment records did not demonstrate that all necessary checks were undertaken to demonstrate suitability for their roles.
  • Patients care needs were assessed and care and treatment was being considered in line with best practice national guidelines. Staff were proactive in promoting good health and referrals were made to other agencies to ensure patients received the treatments they needed.
  • Feedback from patients showed they were very happy with the care given by all staff. They felt listened to, treated with dignity and respect and involved in decision making around their care and treatment.
  • The practice planned its services to meet the differing needs of patients. The practice encouraged patients to give their views about the services offered and made changes as a consequence.
  • Quality and performance were monitored, risks were identified and managed. Staff told us they could raise concerns, felt they were listened to, felt valued and well supported.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:-

  • The practice carried out a range of clinical audits to evaluate the operation of the service. The findings from some audits had been shared outside the practice. For example, an audit of bariatric patients had led to changes in the practice protocols for monitoring the healthcare needs of these patients. This audit was presented to the Royal College of General Practitioners to disseminate the findings more widely and led to the GP who carried out the audit being invited to attend a nutritional panel that makes recommendations nationally.
  • The practice looked after the health needs of the majority of Liverpool’s travelling community. The practice worked closely with a multi-disciplinary team of health and social care professionals to ensure the health needs of the travelling community were met. For example, if follow up services were needed the traveller support workers (qualified nurses) hand delivered letters from the GPs and read them to the travellers as a number were illiterate. The GPs continued to monitor and prescribe medication when they moved to a site in another area in order to promote patient safety and continuity of care.
  • A specialist service was provided to focus on the needs of patients with complex needs, those who were housebound (including those who lived in care homes), on polypharmacy (the use of four or more medications by a patient) and with multiple conditions. Home visits were undertaken by GPs and a comprehensive review of the patients’ health care needs was undertaken. The patients identified were also discussed in multi-disciplinary meetings to ensure their needs were being effectively met. A review was carried out in May 2014 and found there had been changes to patient medication, including a reduction in the amount of prescribed medication compared to results of a review of this service in 2010.
  • The practice was involved in a social work pilot. A social work team for adults was based at the practice. This pilot had been developed to encourage better communication and closer working relationships between health and social care services. This pilot had been in operation since February 2015 and although it had not been evaluated we spoke to staff from the practice, a social worker and the social work team leader who gave us many good examples of how admissions to hospital had been avoided and earlier hospital discharges facilitated due to better communication and faster reaction time from the practice and social services.
  • We spoke to three members of the Patient Forum who had worked with the practice for over 20 years. They told us that many projects had been run at the practice to make patients’ wait more enjoyable. For example, music was played, a patients’ library had been established and a reading project was tried out. The most successful project had been “Nancy’s Kitchen” where volunteers from the Patient Forum provided tea and toast. This continued to be provided at the practice every morning. Members of the Patient Forum told us how socially isolated patients benefitted from this service and how they were able to direct patients to sources of support if requested.

There were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements

Importantly, the provider must:

  • Take action to ensure its recruitment policy, procedures and arrangements are improved to ensure necessary employment checks are in place for all staff and the required information in respect of workers is held.

The provider should:

  • Ensure the serial numbers of all prescription pads and the clinical staff they are issued to are recorded.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice