• Doctor
  • GP practice

Leatside Health Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Manor Surgery, Forth Noweth, Redruth, Cornwall, TR15 1AU (01209) 313313

Provided and run by:
Manor 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 Leatside Health Centre 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 Leatside Health Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

1 March 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced inspection of Leatside Health Centre on 1 March 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Safe - Requires Improvement

Effective - Good

Well-led - Good

Leatside Health Centre is a newly registered practice following a merger in July 2021 of the Clinton Road Surgery and Manor Surgery. Our previous inspections of these two locations were carried out as follows;

Clinton Road Surgery November 2019 - rated Good

The Manor Surgery June 2016 - rated Good.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Clinton Road Surgery and Manor Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

We undertook this inspection at the same time as CQC inspected a range of urgent and emergency care services in Cornwall. To understand the experience of GP Providers and people who use GP services, we asked a range of questions in relation to urgent and emergency care. The responses we received have been used to inform and support system wide feedback.

How we carried out the inspection/review

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing facilities
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • A short site visit

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as Good overall

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm, however we couldn't be assured this was maintained at all times as some annual reviews had not been completed.
  • The practice systems for reviewing safety alerts was not always carried out effectively.
  • All staff had undertaken mandatory training appropriate to their role.
  • Recruitment files contained all relevant information.
  • Prescription stationery was stored securely in line with NHS guidelines.
  • The practice had made adjustments associated with the COVID-19 pandemic to ensure that patients were kept safe and protected from avoidable harm.
  • The practice was able to demonstrate staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. Staff members were appraised annually and received appropriate supervision and training.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care. The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the management team and if they raised concerns these would be listened to and acted upon.
  • The practice had an open and supportive culture, where there was a focus on improvement.

We found breach of Regulation 12 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Safe care and treatment. The provider must make sure they are following up to date guidance and have processes in place and follow them to:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

Also the provider should

  • Continue to improve the service’s cervical screening uptake rates.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

7 June 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Manor Surgery on 7 June 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 they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • 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.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

We saw one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice was SAVVY Kernow (SAVVY Kernow is a name of a scheme in Cornwall which helps young people access health services easily) accredited to level two (one of only 20 services to achieve this level, ensuring their provision is young person friendly in every aspect of service delivery).

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice