The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Spa Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

81 Radford Road, Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, CV31 1NE (01926) 421214

Provided and run by:
Spa 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 Spa 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 Spa Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

12 June 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Spa Medical Centre on 12 June 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.

12 April 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Spa Medical Centre on 12 April 2016. The overall rating for this service is good.

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

  • The practice provided patients with care which was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff told us and records showed that training appropriate to their roles had been carried out. Staff training needs had been identified and planned for the following year.
  • There was a system in place to raise concerns and report significant events. Staff understood their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report significant events. These were discussed regularly at meetings and were a standing agenda item. Learning was shared with practice staff regularly and with other practices in the locality.
  • Information was provided to help patients understand the care available to them. Patients told us they were treated kindly and respectfully by staff at the practice. Their treatment options were explained to them so they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • The practice was well equipped and had good facilities to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available in the reception area and patients told us that they knew how to complain if they needed to.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff told us they felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from patients, which it acted on. Staff appeared motivated to deliver high standards of care and there was evidence of team working throughout the practice.

However there are areas where improvements are needed.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Take action to ensure that the infection control measures in place are followed and applied consistently by all staff.
  • Take action to ensure that all policies and procedures are dated and kept under regular review.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

21 May 2014

During a routine inspection

We found that Spa Medical Centre was safe, effective, caring, well led, and responsive but we identified some areas where the practice may wish to consider making improvements.  The practice was sensitive and responsive to the cultural needs of the population and employed a full time interpreter to address barriers to communication.

Most of the staff at the practice were long serving and demonstrated a commitment to meeting the needs of the practice population.  Staff demonstrated a caring attitude and reported feeling part of a team and supported by management.

During our inspection we spoke with eight patients.  They expressed satisfaction with the service and told us that they experienced good care from doctors and nurses and that the reception staff were polite, helpful and respectful.  Patients described difficulties in obtaining appointments with a GP of their choice but clarified that they were always able to get an appointment with a doctor if necessary.  

The practice had systems and processes in place for reviewing the effectiveness of procedures, for example, clinical audit and significant event analysis (SEA), however, many of these were not well recorded and complete.  This may have presented difficulty for the practice in revisiting and reviewing actions to determine their effectiveness in improving care.  This is an area where the practice may wish to make improvements.

The practice offered an out of hours service via a dedicated number which enabled urgent health concerns to be dealt with appropriately. 

We found that the practice had addressed the needs of the population groups it served.