Broseley Medical Practice

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, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 72 (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 service had mostly detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment and made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

Staff and leaders completed health and safety risk assessments and undertook audits to ensure they had identified and addressed most risks. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Contracts were in place to ensure the premises were maintained.

However, the practice did not have effective systems in place to monitor and track prescription stationery, and access to the key for the locked prescription storage cupboard was unrestricted. This compromised the security of blank prescriptions. In addition, windows blinds with looped cords or chains had not been risk assessed. Following our assessment the provider took immediate action to address these safety concerns and improve processes.

Prescribed medicines belonging to 2 patients were found on the desk in a clinical room. The provider took action to ensure these medicines were appropriately disposed of. All clinical staff were reminded of the providers’ safe medicine disposal and storage protocols, and a significant event was raised to prevent recurrence.

The service had a business continuity plan which was regularly reviewed and outlined how the service should continue to operate in the event of a disruption.

The service made sure there were always enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff received effective support, supervision, appraisal in addition to strong development opportunities. The practice valued and used patient feedback during the appraisal process of clinical staff. Clinical staff told us they welcomed this new initiative to help improve patient experience.

The service employed a range of clinical and non-clinical roles, which included GPs, nurses, a nurse practitioner and health care assistants. Patients also had access to a range of services provided by staff from the Primary Care Network (PCN). Leaders ensured staff were up to date with their training which the service had deemed mandatory and operated within their agreed areas of competence. Competency framework assessments were being introduced for different roles

Staff worked together effectively to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Health care assistants (HCA’s) had been supported to complete the required foundational induction standard in general practice. One HCA had taken on the role of deputy safeguarding lead and had attended numerous training courses to support them in their role. They had shared their learning, obtained leaflets and developed a safeguarding notice board in the waiting area with the current theme being domestic abuse awareness.

Staff expressed appreciation for the support and encouragement provided to further their skills and professional development, for example a Health Care Assistant was looking to upskill and become a Nurse Associate in the future, another clinician was due to attend a Parkinson’s conference to hear about the latest research and share updates and best practice. However, at the time of our site visit non-clinical staff had not completed safeguarding training at the required level, but had since completed the training.

The service followed safe recruitment procedures when employing staff, which were in line with national legislation. This included identity checks, review of qualifications, obtaining of professional references and criminal records checks. Assurances had been obtained for staff employed by the recruiting company, PCN and for locum staff.

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

A designated Infection, prevention and control (IPC) lead was in place and had received additional training to support them in their role. Discussions held with them demonstrated they had a clear understanding of their role and responsibilities. They conducted regular audits to ensure compliance and took action where necessary to mitigate any identified risks.

Staff had completed relevant training in infection, prevention and control to help protect patients and staff from preventable illnesses and ensure the environment met the required standards of cleanliness. There was a record of staff immunisations against potential health care acquired infections for staff employed by the practice.

The service had cleaning schedules available, which outlined how staff should clean the building and its equipment. The service demonstrated how these were monitored for completion to maintain oversight of cleaning arrangements. During our onsite visit, the service's premises and a sample of equipment reviewed was noted to be visibly clean. Feedback we received showed both staff and people who used the service were satisfied with the cleanliness of the practice.

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