• Doctor
  • GP practice

Park Lane Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2 Park Lane, Allestree, Derby, Derbyshire, DE22 2DS (01332) 552461

Provided and run by:
Park Lane Surgery

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 30 June 2025 to 8 July 2025. Park Lane Surgery is a GP practice and delivers service to 8,248 people under a contract held with NHS England. We carried out an assessment because the service had not been inspected since 2016. The National General Practice Profiles states that the ethnic make-up of the practice area is 93.1% White, 3.3% Asian, 2.1% Mixed, 1% Black and 0.5% other. The age distribution of the practice population indicates the practice had a higher number of older people than the local and national averages and lower numbers of young and working age people. Information published by Office for Health Improvement and Disparities shows that deprivation within the practice population group is in the 10th decile (10 of 10). The lower the decile, the more deprived the practice population is relative to others. This assessment considered the demographics of the people using the service, the context the service was working within and how this impacted service delivery. Where relevant, further commentary is provided in the quality statements section of this report.

The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and the majority of risks had been mitigated. However, we found effective systems were not in place for checking the expiry dates of consumables, for example out of date blood bottles. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes. However, record keeping in relation to prescription stationary needed to improve.

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with all agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. Staff ensured the involvement of appropriate professionals and/or people important to the patient in any best interest decisions where patients lack capacity.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. Staff wellbeing was fully embedded within the working practices and ethos of the service.

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service worked to reduce health and care inequalities through training and feedback. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff spoke positively about the leaders, felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. Managers worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care and were receptive to new ideas. There were systems in place to support continuous learning and innovation.

23 February 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park Lane Surgery on 23 February 2016. Overall the practice is rated as outstanding.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report significant events. These were discussed regularly at meetings and were a standing agenda item. Learning was shared with practice staff regularly and with other practices in the locality on an ‘ad hoc’ basis at planned development events.
  • Information about safety alerts was reviewed and communicated to staff by the practice manager in a timely fashion. Recommendations made by the CCG pharmacist following medicines reviews were followed up by GPs.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed through practice meetings and collaborative discussions with the multi-disciplinary team. Patients needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance.
  • Patients we spoke with told us doctors and nurses at the practice treated them 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 in the reception area and patients told us that they knew how to complain if they needed to.
  • Urgent appointments were available on the day they were requested. Patients said that they were able to see their preferred GP within one day. Routine appointments could be booked up to four weeks in advance and were usually available the next day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. This included easy access for patients who were wheelchair users, baby changing facilities and a private room for breastfeeding.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff told us they felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from patients, which it acted on. Staff appeared motivated to deliver high standards of care and there was evidence of team working throughout the practice

We saw several areas of outstanding practice including:

  • Hosting of a screening programme for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA) which was attended by 302 people aged over 65.This led to aneurysms being detected in 5.5% of patients who attended which would otherwise have remained undetected.
  • Implementation of a Melanoma Awareness event at the practice where screening was provided on the day and onward referrals made to treat potential or actual identified skin cancers for five patients who might otherwise have not visited their GP about their skin lesion.
  • The practice utilised a questionnaire so that patients with dementia and their carers were able to identify their preferences. This was done to assist with treating them with dignity and respect at times when they were unable to communicate effectively.

However there was one area of practice where the provider should make improvements:

  • The practice should review the system of clinical audits to ensure all are repeated as part of the continuous improvement in outcomes for patients

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice