The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Victoria Road Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

229-233 Victoria Road, Aston, Birmingham, West Midlands, B6 5HP 0845 070 2699

Provided and run by:
Victoria Road Medical Centre

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Victoria Road 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 Victoria Road Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

17 September 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Victoria Road Medical Centre on 17 September 2019. 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.

22 June 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Victoria Road Medical Centre on 16 June 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the June 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Victoria Road Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 31 May 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection on the 16 June 2016.

Overall the practice is rated as Good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • During our previous inspection we saw that administrative staff processed letters received from other organisations such as hospitals and forwarded those requiring action to the GP. However, there was no clinical oversight in place ensure that triage and actions were appropriate and safe. At this follow up inspection we saw this had been reviewed and a safer process introduced.
  • When we inspected the practice in June 2016 we saw performance for mental health related indicators was lower compared to local and national averages. The practice reviewed this and the most current published data showed improved achievement for mental health indicators.
  • When we inspected the practice in June 2016 results from the national GP patient survey showed that patient’s satisfaction with how they could access care and treatment was lower compared to local and national averages, particularly around telephone access. The practice had employed administration staff which resulted in 20 hours additional reception support during peak times. It also allowed the practice more flexibility as shifts could be changed to match demand.
  • Plans were in place to install a new telephone system that will provide a live feedback of demand (the number of calls waiting and the number of dropped call) through an information board enabling the practice to better match resources to demand.

In addition the provider should:

  • Ensure ongoing quality improvement strategies can demonstrate positive impact on access to appointments.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

16 June 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Victoria Road Medical Centre on 16 June 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement

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 been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • An administration staff member processed letter received from other organisations such as hospitals and forwarded those requiring action to the GP. However, there was no clinical oversight in place from a clinician to ensure no actions were being missed.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • National patient survey data showed that patients rated the practice lower than local and national averages for consultations with GPs and nurses and for access to appointments. However, we saw evidence that the practice had made an improvement in this was also being reflected in the data.
  • The majority of patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. However, some patients also stated that some staff members could be rude at times.
  • 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.
  • Some patients said they found it difficult to get an appointment. The practice was trying to recruit a GP.
  • 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 sought feedback patients, which it acted on. However, there remained areas of concern which needed to be addressed based on patient feedback from national surveys.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure letters from external organisations such as hospitals are triaged and actioned with clear clinical oversight.

  • Ensure that the system for recalling and reviewing patients experiencing poor mental health is robust.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

Continue to ensure areas of concern identified in the national surveys, comments cards and feedback from patients are addressed, including access to appointments and consultations with GPs and nurses.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

24 June 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We undertook this follow up visit in response to concerns that we had identified during our previous inspection of the service in July 2013. Our visit was discussed and arranged with the provider in advance so that any disruption to people's care and treatment were minimised.

At our previous inspection we identified that the provider did not have effective systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service that the practice delivered. At the time of the inspection we judged that this had a moderate impact on people who used the service and asked the provider to take action. Following the inspection in July 2013, the provider sent us an action plan which set out how they would address the issues raised.

During this inspection we spoke with the practice manager, a GP and a practice nurse. We also reviewed various documents that were made available to us. We found that the provider had taken appropriate action to improve the service patients received.

Systems had been put in place to support learning from complaints and incidents and ensure action was taken to improve the service that patients received. Audits were used to identify areas for service improvement.

10 July 2013

During a routine inspection

On the day of our inspection we spoke with six patients and six members of staff. One patient told us, "I am happy with the service I get here, I have no complaints." Five out of the six patients we spoke with said they were able to obtain appointments at a time to suit their needs and that they did not have to wait long once they arrived at the practice.

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. One patient told us, "They very much treat you with respect." We saw that patients experienced care and treatment that met their needs. Patients told us and we saw that care was delivered in a clean environment.

The staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about safeguarding vulnerable adults and children and we saw that they had received training on this.

The quality monitoring systems in place required improvement. Complaints and incidents had not been analysed to ensure learning and improvements to practice took place. There was a lack of audits to inform risk and necessary improvements required.