The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Archived: Ryminster Healthcare

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

1 Charlesworth Court, Knights Way, Battlefield Enterprise Park, Shrewsbury, SY1 3AB 0333 900 0010

Provided and run by:
Ryminster Healthcare Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

26 May 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This service is rated as Good overall.

We carried out a remote inspection review of Ryminster Healthcare on 26 May 2021.

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ryminster Healthcare on the 24 May 2018 as part of our inspection programme, the practice was not rated at this inspection. We carried out a further inspection on the 25 June 2019, the overall rating for the practice was good with requires improvement for providing well led services.

You can read the reports from our last inspections, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Ryminster Healthcare on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was an announced focused inspection to confirm that the service had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified at our previous inspection on 25 June 2019. The focus of this inspection was to review the well-led domain. We found that the practice had resolved the concerns raised and was rated as good for providing well led services. We carried forward the ratings for safe, effective, caring and responsive as the information we held did not indicate any changes to these ratings.

How we carried out the inspection

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:

  • A remote video interview with the Quality and Development Manager/Registered Manager for the service.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.

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.

Ryminster Healthcare is part of Ryminster Healthcare Limited. It provides private primary healthcare appointments to adults over 18 years of age and has arrangements in place for secondary referral to diagnostic and specialist services as appropriate.

The quality development manager is the registered manager for the service. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are “registered persons”. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Our key findings were:

  • Systems were introduced to demonstrate that all safety alerts were received and acted on in a timely way.
  • Documented consent was obtained for all treatments carried out at the service particularly where there may be a high risk of side effects.
  • The service had introduced effective governance arrangements that assured the delivery of high quality care and treatment. For example, clinical audits were completed to monitor the outcomes and quality of services provided.
  • The service had introduced systems for the documentation of clinical performance discussions held with clinical staff which supported the review of clinical consultations, prescribing and referral decisions.
  • The service had reviewed the format of meetings to ensure a formal agenda was in place which included significant events as a standard agenda item and the documentation of more detailed minutes to demonstrate shared learning with staff.
  • Patient feedback indicated that patients were very satisfied with the service.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the ‘Duty of Candour’.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

25 June 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ryminster Healthcare as part of our inspection programme. The inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 so that an overall rating could be given.

Ryminster Healthcare is part of Ryminster Healthcare Limited. It provides private primary healthcare appointments to adults over 18 years of age and has arrangements in place for secondary referral to diagnostic and specialist services as appropriate.

The practice manager is the registered manager for the location. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are “registered persons”. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Four patients had completed Care Quality Commission ‘Share Your Experience’ feedback forms online. All comments received were positive and examples of these included that they received clear explanations about their treatment and any tests. Patients said that they were satisfied with the service and advice they received.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice had some systems in place for monitoring and managing risks to patient and staff safety. However, there were some gaps as systems were not in place to ensure that all safety alerts were received and acted on in a timely way.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care and treatment was tailored to individual needs.
  • Effective systems were not in place to ensure clinical audits were completed and measured against national guidance to review and improve patient outcomes.

  • Patients’ were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients received detailed and clear information about their proposed treatment, which enabled them to make an informed decision. This included the costs, risks and benefit of the treatment.
  • Staff were qualified and had the skills, experience and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patient feedback indicated that patients were very satisfied with the service.
  • Staff felt supported by the leadership and the service team worked well together.
  • There was a clear vision to provide a high quality, personalised service.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

(Please see the specific details on action required at the end of this report).

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Consider documenting the performance discussions held with clinical staff following a review of consultations, prescribing and referral decisions.
  • Review the topics discussed at meetings to include significant events as a standard agenda item and demonstrate shared learning with staff.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care