The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Greenbank Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

274 Manchester Road, Warrington, Cheshire, WA1 3RB (01925) 631132

Provided and run by:
Greenbank Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Greenbank Surgery 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 Greenbank Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

15 February 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Greenbank Surgery on 15 February 2020. 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.

1/5/18

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection 12 May 2015 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Greenbank Surgery on 1 May 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

Previously we carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Greenbank Surgery on 1 May 2015. The overall rating for the practice was good with a rating of outstanding for the key question of well-led and outstanding for the population group of people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable. The full comprehensive report on the May 2015 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Greenbank Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients told us they found it difficult to book an appointment with a GP of their choice but reported they were extremely happy with consultations.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • We received eight comment cards all of which were highly positive about the level of care experienced.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • There was a system in place to manage and learn from significant incidents and complaints.


Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

21 May 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Greenbank Surgery on 21 May 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring and responsive services, with outstanding leadership.  The practice was good for providing services for older people; people with long term conditions; families, children and younger people; working age people and people experiencing poor mental health including dementia. The practice provided outstanding care and treatment for those people whose circumstances made them vulnerable.

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

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns. Safeguarding systems were well developed; GPs had strong working links with child health teams and child protection teams. Safeguarding records were detailed, comprehensive and were shared appropriately and in a timely manner.
  • Practice partners extended the scope of learning for all GPs by requesting reports or information from coroners on the cause of unexpected deaths.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance; where any change of medication was recommended, each patient’s need was considered individually.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect.
  • Patients told us it was easier to make an appointment with a named GP, since the practice had made staffing changes. Patients said there was more continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day. Changes made to the staffing of the practice had resulted in 100 extra GP appointments each week, demonstrating that the practice was responsive to patients’ needs.
  • The practice partners had invested in the development of facilities at the practice, which was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.  
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. We saw evidence of audit driving improvements in services offered to patients. The practice leadership reviewed workloads of all clinicians and support staff, ensuring that demand was manageable and that patients were attended to by clinicians that were sensitive, focused and responsive to patient needs.

There was also an area of practice where the provider could make improvements. 

In addition the provider should:

  • Decommission an old air conditioning system in the data/server room of the practice.

 

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice