We carried out a review of the data available to us about St Martin's Gate Surgery 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 St Martin's Gate Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of St Martin’s Gate Surgery on 1 December 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
People were protected by a strong, comprehensive safety system and a focus on openness, transparency and learning when things went wrong. Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. Opportunities for learning from internal and external incidents were maximised.
Risks to patients were comprehensively assessed and well managed.
Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff were sufficiently trained and had the appropriate knowledge and experience to effectively deliver care and treatment.
Patient outcomes were in line with or above local and national averages.
Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and that they were suitably involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
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.
Chief Inspector of General Practice
When patients received care or treatment they were asked for their consent and their wishes were listened to. One patient told us: "That has never been a problem". We found that when minor surgery had been carried out that the doctor had obtained written consent from the patients before the surgery had commenced.
We saw that patient's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and that they were treated with dignity and respect. The patients we spoke with provided positive feedback about their care. A patient said: "We are very happy here, we would have changed doctors if we were not happy".
Staff had received training in safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. They were aware of the appropriate agencies to refer safeguarding concerns to that ensured patients were protected from harm.
Patients were cared for in modern purpose built premises. The provider had ensured that the premises had been well maintained to ensure a safe environment for patients visits.
The provider had systems in place for monitoring the quality of service provision. There was an established system for regularly obtaining opinions from patients about the standards of the services they received. This meant that on-going improvements could be made by the practice staff.