• Doctor
  • GP practice

The Spinney Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

23 Whittle Street, St Helens, Merseyside, WA10 3EB (01744) 758999

Provided and run by:
The Spinney Medical Centre

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Spinney Medical Centre 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 The Spinney Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

11 September 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about The Spinney Medical Centre on 11 September 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.

23 September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Spinney Medical Centre on 23 September 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • The practice is situated in a purpose built health centre and has a separate administration building. The practice was clean and had good facilities including disabled access, translation services and a hearing loop.
  • There were systems in place to mitigate safety risks including analysing significant events and safeguarding.
  • The practice was aware of and had systems in place to ensure compliance with the requirements of the duty of candour. (The duty of candour is a set of specific legal requirements that providers of services must follow when things go wrong with care and treatment).
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with current legislation.
  • 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. The practice sought patient views about improvements that could be made to the service; including having a patient participation group (PPG) and acted, where possible, on feedback.
  • Staff worked well together as a team and all felt supported to carry out their roles.

The practice is rated outstanding for well led because of the strong leadership and an open and committed culture for education and development. For example:

  • The practice had asked for an external risk review from their medical indemnity insurer and as a result improved their systems in place. For example, the complaints process. The complaints process was altered so that it required a second person with the same role to independently review any response to a complaint sent to a patient.
  • The practice proactively worked with the patient participation group to support patients, in particular carers. There was a ‘care for carers’ policy. In collaboration with the PPG the practice facilitated educational sessions for patients and invited guest speakers. These sessions were used as an opportunity to provide patients with information on a range of general health topics. The practice won the local Healthwatch’s Patient- Friendly Practice Award in 2016.
  • There was a focus on continuous learning. In 2015 the practice was designated as one of six Enhanced Training Practices across Health Education North West and coordinated all non-medical student university placements across four boroughs. Staff were encouraged in their careers. For example, the nurse had taken a prescriber’s course as a result of discussions at appraisal. The practice was aware of not only the shortage of GPs nationally, but within the local area and worked with local schools to provide career advice for students interested in medicine.

However, there were improvements that should be made.

The practice should:

  • Review the equipment and processes for cleaning the premises and clinical equipment to ensure national guidance is followed.
  • Analyse incidents in order to identify any trends to prevent reoccurrence.
  • Include reference to emergency situations in their home visiting policy.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice