You are here

Clifton House Medical Centre Good


Review carried out on 7 October 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Clifton House Medical Centre on 7 October 2021. 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 Clifton House Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

Review carried out on 15 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Clifton House Medical Centre on 15 November 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.

Inspection carried out on 25 May 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Clifton House Medical Centre on 25 May 2016. 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 been trained to provide them with 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients said there was continuity of care although problems in making appointments was the main area of concern or complaint.
  • 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 proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • There was a coherent and robust focus on training and development opportunities for staff, led by a dedicated human resources manager.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • All patients newly diagnosed with diabetes were referred to an ‘expert diabetic clinic’. This service provided patients with individualised support and advice on diet and lifestyle and accompanied each patient on a supermarket trip to help them identify healthy food choices.
  • The practice ensured new patients whose first language was not English had an interpreter with them during their first appointment.
  • The practice provided an interpreter to parents whose children had received vaccinations outside of the UK. This helped to make sure children did not receive the same vaccine more than once.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice