Adelaide Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that staff protected people from avoidable harm and made sure care was delivered from environments that were clean and well maintained. At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good.

At this assessment, we focused on 3 quality statements relating to the key question Safe: Safe environments, Safe and effective staffing and Infection prevention and control. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The practice detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. It made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The practice had arrangements in place to ensure the premises was maintained. Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed all risks. Potential risks in the care environment were well-managed. The premises were purpose-built as a healthcare facility.

We saw evidence that regular premises checks and risk assessments were carried out. These included a general premises and fire safety risk assessment in July 2026, with an inspection of the practice’s fire extinguishers, emergency lighting and alarm system. We saw records confirming regular fire alarm testing was carried out and that fire drills were conducted. Medical equipment had been inspected and calibrated in October 2025. Portable appliance safety testing (PAT) had been carried out in February 2026, and a fixed wiring inspection was conducted in March 2026.

The practice had up to date policies covering health, safety and welfare. We saw evidence of staff completing a range of mandatory safety training appropriate to the roles and responsibilities.

The practice had a detailed business continuity plan which was reviewed annually, most recently in July 2026, and set out how the service would continue to operate in the event of a disruption, including an option to temporarily relocate to another practice within the primary care network.

The practice made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The practice’s clinical team was comprised of the 5 GP partners and 6 salaried GPs. Staff told us 2 more salaried GPs were due to start at the practice in October 2026. It is a teaching practice and there were 2 GP registrars on placement there when we carried out our assessment. The clinical team also included 3 nurses, 3 physician assistants and a healthcare assistant. A clinical pharmacist and a social prescriber were shared with other practices within the primary care network. The practice had an administrative team of 16 other staff.

Leaders ensured staff were up to date with training which was deemed mandatory and that they operated within their agreed areas of competence. From our review of staff records, we saw the practice followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, a review of qualifications, obtaining references and a criminal records (DBS) check. New staff were subject to a probationary period. We saw evidence of staff receiving annual appraisals, monitoring any training and development needs.

The practice had appropriate equipment and medicines for use in medical emergencies. These included an oxygen supply, with suitable fittings for children, and a portable defibrillator. We saw evidence confirming staff regularly checked the equipment and medicines. Records showed staff had up to date training in resuscitation, adult and child basic life support and sepsis awareness. They had also received training relating to significant events and safety incidents.

The practice assessed and managed the risk of infection. It detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The practice had a comprehensive Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) Policy, which was regularly reviewed and updated, most recently in July 2026. One of the practice nurses was the named clinical lead, supported by the practice manager. We saw evidence that IPC audits were carried out every 6 months, most recently in August 2026. We saw that issues noted had been properly actioned.

The practice had logs and checklists demonstrating how the premises and equipment were cleaned. At our onsite visit, the premises and equipment were visibly clean. Cleaning was carried out by a contractor. We saw there was a system for monitoring the contractor’s performance and to feedback any concerns. There were arrangements in place for the management of clinical waste and there were suitable procedures for specimen collection and handling.

A legionella risk assessment had been conducted in August 2026. There were arrangements in place for water temperature to be monitored weekly and for regular sampling and analysis. Records showed relevant staff had completed legionella awareness training.

Staff had completed relevant training in infection prevention and control appropriate to their roles and responsibilities. We saw records were maintained and monitored to ensure relevant staff were up to date with necessary immunisations.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.