The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Poplar Grove Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Meadow Way, Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, HP20 1XB (01296) 468580

Provided and run by:
Poplar Grove Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Poplar Grove Practice 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 Poplar Grove Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

29 January 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Poplar Grove Practice on 29 January 2020. 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.

15 Jan 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Poplar Grove Practice in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire on 15 January 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

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 and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. The practice had actively reviewed access to the practice. The majority of patients could access care and treatment in a timely way, however further improvements could be made.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

We saw an area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice provided an outstanding service to patients with caring responsibilities. This service was recognised by Carers Bucks (an independent charity to support unpaid, family carers in Buckinghamshire) and the practice was awarded an Investors in Carers GP Standard award. This was in recognition of the extra support they offer to unpaid carers who were registered at the practice.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should :

  • Look at methods to improve the uptake of cervical screening for eligible patients.
  • Continue to improve the appointment system to ensure patients were able to contact the practice to make appointments without difficulty.

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

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

12 January 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Poplar Grove Practice on 12 January 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

  • The practice had a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority. The strategy to deliver this vision had been produced with stakeholders and was regularly reviewed and discussed with staff.
  • 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.
  • Feedback from patients about their care was consistently and strongly positive. However, patients told us telephone access was not working well.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • It was evident the practice had gone through a period of transition including a merge of practices and implementation of a new management team. 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. For example, the recently revised appointment system.

The area where the provider should make improvement is:

  • Continue to improve the appointment system to ensure patients are able to contact the practice to make appointments without difficulty.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 March 2014

During a routine inspection

We observed staff speaking with people in person and also on the telephone. We saw staff were friendly and polite and offered choices to patients. We found people who used the service were treated with dignity and respect. We spoke with two people who used the

service. One person said "It is very good here, they have very good receptionists who are very professional. I try to get appointments that suit me as a working parent." Another person said "It's a good surgery they have helped me a lot I am offered appointments and then take the one that suits me. They talk to my relative with dignity and respect."

People who used the service were protected against the risk of abuse. Staff received training in abuse awareness and protecting children and vulnerable adults. The policies and procedures were available to all staff in relation to safeguarding.

We found people were protected from the risk of infection as treatment was delivered in a clean and hygienic environment.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

We found the provider had an accurate Statement of Purpose which contained the necessary information including aim and objectives, the kinds of services provided, names of key individuals working for the service, legal status of the provider and details of the office address.

There was an effective complaints system in place. Complaints people made were responded to appropriately.