• Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Crawford Street Surgery

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

The Crawford St Surgery, 95-97 Crawford Street, London, W1H 2HJ (020) 7723 6324

Provided and run by:
Crawford Street Surgery

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

26 September 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Crawford Street Surgery on 11 February 2016. The practice was rated as good for providing effective, caring, responsive and well-led services, and requires improvement for providing safe services. Overall the practice was rated as good. The full comprehensive report on the February 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Crawford Street Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced comprehensive follow up inspection on 26 September 2017 to check for improvements since our previous inspection. The practice is now rated as requires improvement for providing effective and caring services, and good for providing safe, responsive and well-led services. Overall the practice is now rated as requires improvement.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to checking uncollected repeat prescriptions and the monitoring of patients taking azathioprine.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework showed patient outcomes were below average compared to the national average.
  • There was evidence of quality improvement activity including clinical audit.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey 2017 showed patients rated the practice below average for satisfaction scores on consultations with the GPs and for several other aspects of care.
  • Patients we spoke with 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.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • 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 the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

However, there were also areas of practice where the provider should make improvements.

Importantly, the provider must:

  • Ensure that all patients’ needs are identified and care and treatment meets their needs.

The provider should:

  • Review the systems for monitoring patients on high risk medicines, and checking uncollected blank prescriptions.
  • Consider ways to improve performance against national screening programmes.
  • Review ways to improve patient satisfaction with consultations, and the availability and punctuality of appointments.
  • Continue to identify and support patients who are carers.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

11 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Crawford Street Surgery on 11 February 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. However, the practice recognised that clinical meetings needed to be minuted to provide documentary evidence of discussion of lessons learned and agreed decisions and action.
  • Risks to patients who used services were assessed and managed. However, the systems and processes to address these risks were not implemented well enough to ensure patients were kept safe. There were some deficiencies in safeguarding training, medicines management and in the documentation relating to the practice’s recruitment processes. In addition, whilst there was an evacuation plan in place no fire drills had been undertaken in the last six months.
  • Although CCG led clinical audits had been carried out to drive improvement, two practice initiated audits showing the completion of the full audit cycle had not been concluded at the time of the inspection.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • 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.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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 improvements are:

  • Ensure all GP staff are trained in safeguarding children to the appropriate level in accordance with national guidance and address gaps in training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults.
  • Complete and record the risk assessment of the practice’s decision not to stock medicine excluded from the emergency medicines kit. Ensure a record of prescription pads batch numbers is kept to maintain prescription security.
  • Ensure patients are fully protected against the risks associated with the recruitment of staff; in particular in ensuring all appropriate pre-employment reference checks are documented in staff records.

In addition, the areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Ensure clinical meetings are minuted to provide an audit trail of discussion and agreed decisions and actions.
  • Produce a written cleaning schedule to show work completed and record monitoring checks.
  • Organise and document more regular fire drills.
  • Ensure full cycle audits currently underway are completed.
  • Display information in the patient waiting area about the practice’s vision and values.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice