The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Fishergate Hill Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

50 Fishergate Hill, Preston, Lancashire, PR1 8DN (01772) 254484

Provided and run by:
Fishergate Hill 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 Fishergate Hill 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 Fishergate Hill Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

28 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Fishergate Hill Surgery on 28 August 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.

2nd September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Fishergate Hill Surgery on 2nd September 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 the services provided 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 found one area of outstanding practice:

  • The practice had developed a credit card sized useful telephone numbers hand out for patients with mental health problems who were at risk of significant self harm which included contact numbers for the crisis team and Samaritans.

The areas where the provider should make improvements :

  • Practice staff should establish a more robust system of clinical audits which demonstrate quality improvement over three completed cycles.
  • The practice team should consider establishing more formalised meetings which minute discussions about serious events, complaint etc. The action points should be logged and brought forward for review.
  • Continue to monitor the number of patients identified as carers.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

19 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited the surgery on 19th September 2013 and spoke to the practice manager, general practitioner, staff and patients. We looked at outcomes 1, 4, 7, 12 and 16. During our inspection we assessed standards relating to respecting and involving people, care and welfare, safeguarding people from abuse and how people were supported to be involved in their care. Standards relating to staff recruitment and monitoring the quality of service provision were also inspected. We did not identify any concerns in any of the outcome areas we assessed.

We were able to speak with six people who used the service (patients). They confirmed that all of the staff always explained what they were going to do. One patient we spoke with told us that, "This is a great practice and I have been a patient here since I was a child. The receptionists are wonderful, friendly and know me, so I don't mind visiting'. All of the patients we spoke with said that they felt confident that their doctor understood their condition. One patient told us, "I was told if I had any worries or questions about treatments or having to come to clinics then I can make an appointment with the doctor or nurse and that puts my mind at ease'.

The practice participates in the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF), a system used to monitor the quality of services in GP practices. However a programme of systematic audits would show how the practice monitored the quality and effectiveness of services provided to its patients.