Station Road Surgery

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.

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.

Patients felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding. Representatives from the Patient Participation Group (PPG) felt the provider took concerns seriously and proactively made improvements to the service. Staff who we spoke to were aware of how to raise incidents, and they told us that learning was shared with them on both an individual basis, and organisation wide. Leaders detailed how they supported the process, and staff as required.

Staff felt there was an open culture, and that safety was a top priority. There was a system to record and investigate complaints, and when things went wrong, staff apologised and gave people support. Learning from incidents and complaints resulted in changes that improved care for others.

The service worked with patients 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 patients moved between different services. Staff we spoke to were all aware of care pathways, including referrals and managing care of patients who had been discharged from other services. Leaders at the service shared relevant information with staff in team meetings.

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 patients and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving patients 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.

The practice had two safeguarding GP leads (a lead and a deputy) who were allocated time to review patients where there were safeguarding concerns. Staff at the service were aware of how to make safeguarding referrals and knew the identity of the safeguarding leads if further advice was needed.

Safeguarding policies were in place and known to staff. Staff were were appropriately trained in safeguarding procedures. The practice maintained a list of vulnerable patients and acted on concerns working in partnership with other organisations.

The provider carried out staff checks at the time of recruitment and on an ongoing basis where appropriate. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were undertaken where required. (DBS checks identify whether a person has a criminal record or is on an official list of people barred from working in roles where they may have contact with children or adults who may be vulnerable).

The service worked with patients to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet patients’ needs that was safe, supportive and enabled patients 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. Staff reported that they were included in risk management, and that they felt supported and listened to when things went wrong. Staff also received fire safety and health and safety training.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. We observed that the premises in which the service was in place was fit for use. All equipment had been checked and calibrated as required.

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 had a clear induction program. Staff told us that the induction when they started at the service had been helpful. Staff also received 1 to 1 and team support from managers and received appraisals.

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 patients needs, capacities and preferences. They involved patients in planning, including when changes happened.

Staff involved patients in reviews of their medicines and helped them understand how to manage their medicines safely. Patients knew what to do and who to contact if their condition did not improve or they experienced any unexpected symptoms. Staff received regular training, were competency assessed on medicines optimisation, and felt confident managing the storage, administration and recording of medicines. Staff managed prescription stationery appropriately and securely.

Staff followed protocols to ensure they prescribed all medicines safely, and ensured people received all recommended medicines reviews and monitoring. Medicines were stored securely and at appropriate temperatures. Staff regularly checked the stock levels and expiry dates for all medicines.

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. Staff followed established processes to ensure patients prescribed medicines with specific risks received recommended monitoring.

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. We carried out searches on the practice’s clinical records as part of our assessment. In the large majority of cases, requisite monitoring of medicines had been completed within timescales set by national guidance. Where this had not occurred, patients had been regularly contacted to attend the practice, and where required, medicines were provided in lower quantities until monitoring was complete.