We carried out a review of the data available to us about William Fisher 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 William Fisher Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at William Fisher Medical Centre on 2 August 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
The practice demonstrated to us a safely run service over time.
We found there was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
There were robust processes in place for managing medicines.
Effective standards of cleanliness and hygiene were maintained throughout the practice.
The practice had a system in place to ensure enough staff with the right skill mix were on duty to ensure safe care delivery.
Staff had received appropriate training to undertake their roles and responsibilities.
The practice recognised the importance of the continuing development of staff skills, competence and knowledge to ensure high-quality care.
The practice held several different meetings with health care professionals to share and coordinate services for patients.
Staff understood the relevant consent and decision making requirements of legislation and guidance.
Staff used every contact as an opportunity to identify potential risks to patients health and signposted them to support to live healthier lives.
There was a strong, visible, person-centred culture within the practice. Staff were highly motivated to offer care that was kind and promoted patient’s dignity.
Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. We found improvements had been made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
The practice had a clear vision and a set of values, with patient’s wellbeing as a priority.
There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
The practice actively sought the views from a wide range of stakeholder, including patients, staff, visiting professionals and commissioners about their experience of and quality of care and treatment delivered.
We saw an area of outstanding practice that ensured that patients with long term conditions;
The practice adopted a proactive approach to understanding the needs of different groups of patients and to deliver care in a way that met these needs. The practice had employed a practice matron to provide a bespoke service for these patients at the practice. This ensured joined up care delivery to patients.
The matron visited care homes weekly to review patients and to support staff in understanding and managing patient’s medical conditions. Home visits were arranged in conjunction with a GP, for the review of patients with long term conditions that were unable to attend the surgery.
The matron conducted reviews of all A&E attendances, hospital admissions and discharges. Where relevant the practice arranged a telephone call or home visit to identify if any support was required.
The practice had identified a delay in receiving discharge information. The practice matron liaises with the hospitals and follows up the patient on discharge to ensure the patient’s health and wellbeing needs had been meet
The practice matron reviewed and promoted the carers register ensuring this group of patients received support, advice and checks for their wellbeing so that they were able to provide the care required.
Chief Inspector of General Practice