You are here

Waterside Medical Practice Good

Reports


Inspection carried out on 22 October 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an inspection of this service due to the length of time since the last inspection. At our last inspection, we rated the practice as good overall. Following our review of the information available to us, including information provided by the practice, we focused our inspection on the following key questions: effective and well led.

Because of the assurance received from our review of information we carried forward the ratings for the following key questions: safe, caring and responsive.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall. During our previous inspection we rated safe, caring and responsive as good. During this inspection we rated effective and well led as good. We rated the older people population group as outstanding.

We have rated the practice as good for providing effective services because:

  • Patients’ received care and treatment that met their needs and was delivered in line with evidence-based guidance. The practice reviewed the quality of care delivered.
  • Staff received training to carry out their roles and worked well with other organisations.
  • Staff were proactive in helping patients to live healthier lives.

We rated the practice as outstanding for the older people population group.

  • The population of the practice was disproportionately older than the average for the CCG and the practice had focussed effective care to meet the needs of patient groups. The practice had developed a ‘leg clinic’ and ‘leg club’ which had enhanced care for older patients with leg wounds. Patients received a detailed program of care, which included a full vascular assessment, complimented by social support. Data demonstrated improved wound healing rates which had improved from 24 to 12 weeks. Survey data showed a positive impact on patient wellbeing.

We rated the practice as good for providing well led services because:

  • There was compassionate, inclusive and effective leadership at all levels
  • There was a demonstrated commitment to using data and information proactively to drive and support decision making
  • The practice pro-actively engaged with staff and external partners to sustain high quality and sustainable care.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Inspection carried out on 24 November 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Waterside Medical Practice on 24 November 2015. 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.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • 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.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice