• Doctor
  • GP practice

Altrincham Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lloyd House, 7 Lloyd Street, Altrincham, Cheshire, WA14 2DD (0161) 928 2424

Provided and run by:
Altrincham Medical 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 Altrincham Medical 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 Altrincham Medical Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

17 November 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced inspection and site visit at Altrincham Medical Practice on 17 November 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Caring - Good (rating awarded at the inspection 10 December 2015)

Responsive – Good (rating awarded at the inspection 10 December 2015)

Well-led - Good

The practice was also rated Good at our previous inspection on 10 December 2015 and outstanding for the well led key question. At this inspection, we found that those areas previously regarded as outstanding practice were now embedded throughout the majority of GP practices. While the provider had maintained this good practice, the threshold to achieve an outstanding rating had not been reached.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Altrincham Medical Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We undertook this inspection as part of a selection of services rated good and outstanding who have not been inspected for five years or more.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • Feedback from staff using questionnaires
  • A short site visit

Our findings

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.

We found that:

  • The practice cared for patients in a way that kept them safe and protected them from avoidable harm, this included safeguarding and management of risk.
  • 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 adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations. However the provider should:

  • Continue with the plan to complete summarising of outstanding patient records.
  • Review personnel files so that the documentation retained for each person is consistent.
  • Continue to work on ways to improve cervical screening uptake.

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

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

10th December 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Altrincham Medical Practice on 10th December 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 very clear leadership structure and staff felt particularly 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 provider should :

  • Introduce a system so that patients are routinely advised about the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) if they are unhappy with their received response.In addition, learningfrom complaints should be more widely disseminated and discussed to ensure that all staff are aware when things go wrong.

  • Check that patient records are documented when patients are offered, but refuse the services of a chaperone.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice undertook a continuous audit process throughout the year which involved all members of staff and was not restricted to clinical audit. The findings from those audits were used to make changes, improve services anddevelop staff into roles which were better equipped to meet patients needs and provide positive outcomes.

  • The practice regularly gathered feedback from patients through patient satisfaction forms which were handed out by all the clinicians at various intervals. A member of staff was responsible for collating the feedback and reporting positive and negative comments back to the practice manager, which was then addressed with each clinician where necessary.

  • There was a high level of constructive engagement with staff and a high level of staff satisfaction. Staff roles and responsibilities were altered and enhanced to meet the demands of patients’s needs. Training and reward was provided to support staff in those role changes.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice