The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Park View Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

87 Beverley Road, Hessle, Humberside, HU13 9AJ (01482) 648552

Provided and run by:
Dr Kah Wai Lee

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

28 September 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park View Surgery on 26 – 28 September. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Safe - Good

Effective - Good

Caring - Good

Responsive - Good

Well-led - Good

Following our previous inspection in May 2021, the practice was rated requires improvement overall and for all key questions except for providing an effective service which was rated as good.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection to follow up breaches of regulation from a previous inspection in May 2021. At our last inspection there were breaches of Regulation 12 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Safe care and treatment and Regulation 17 HSCA (RA) Regulations 2014 Good governance. At the last inspection we found:

  • The practice was unable to clearly demonstrate that their systems and processes supported the safety of patients and the governance of the practice.
  • A lack of oversight in relation to governance in areas such as medicines management, training and assurance processes.
  • Learning from complaints and significant events was not maximised.

At this inspection, we found that these concerns from the previous inspection had been addressed. Although learning from complaints had improved this could still be further developed.

How we carried out the inspection/review

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • 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 found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice proactively managed patients with long term conditions.
  • The practice had embedded systems in place to keep people safe and safeguarded from abuse.
  • The provider had achieved a significant uptake in patients being screened for breast cancer compared to local and national averages.
  • The practice identified patients who were digitally excluded and offered appointments to teach patients how to access online services, including the NHS App.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to monitor access to the practice alongside their action plan for improving this.
  • Continue to work on how complaints are used to improve quality.
  • Monitor their action plan put in place to ensure the results of the National GP Patient survey improve as anticipated.
  • Review and improve the arrangements for patients to see a GP of the gender of their choice, should this be specifically requested.

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

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

13 May 2021

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at Park View Surgery on 13 May 2021. Overall, the practice is rated as Requires improvement.

The ratings for each key question are

  • Safe Requires improvement
  • Effective - Good
  • Caring Requires improvement
  • Responsive – Requires improvement
  • Well-led – Requires improvement

Following our previous inspection on 14 and 31 January 2020 the practice was rated Requires Improvement overall and for all key questions but Good for providing effective and caring services:

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

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a comprehensive inspection to follow up on:

  • breaches of regulations identified in previous inspection

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
  • 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 Requires improvement overall and Requires improvement for all population groups.

We found that:

  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • The practice adjusted how it delivered services to meet the needs of patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.

We found breaches of regulations and the areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way.
  • Ensure effective systems and processes to ensure good governance are embedded and monitored.

Also, the provider should:

  • Review the system that identifies patients who are also carers to help ensure that all patients on the practice list who are carers are offered relevant support if appropriate.

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

14 January 2020 and 31 January 2020

During a routine inspection

At this inspection we followed up on should improves identified at a previous inspection on 29 July 2019 when the practice was rated requires improvement for the well led key question. The report on the July 2019 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Park View Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

At the last inspection in July 2019 we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing well led services because:

  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. However, following significant changes to the management and staff team in the months leading up to the inspection we found that changes implemented and proposed were not yet fully embedded into practice.

This inspection was started as an unannounced focused inspection on 14 January 2020 to confirm that the practice had taken action to address the improvements required and to follow up on information received by CQC. On the 14 January we identified concerns in the safe, responsive and well led key questions and therefore returned on the 31 January 2020 to follow up on these concerns.

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 and other organisations.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe, responsive and well-led services because:

  • The practice was not consistently able to demonstrate that the systems they had in place to keep patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm were always well embedded.
  • There were issues with telephone access and the complaints process and access to complaints information for patients.
  • The practice was unable to clearly demonstrate that the systems and processes in place to support the governance of the practice were well embedded, to maintain effective oversight of the service and to deliver service improvements.

These areas affected all population groups so we rated all population groups as requires improvement in responsive.

We rated the practice as good for providing effective and caring services because:

  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.

These areas affected all population groups, so we rated all population groups as good in effective.

We found breaches of regulations and the areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure that care and treatment is provided in a safe way.
  • Ensure adequate staff are deployed to meet the needs of the patients.
  • Ensure the complaints process is followed and information is available for patients.
  • Ensure effective systems and processes to ensure good governance are embedded and monitored.

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

29 July 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Park View Surgery on 29 July 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

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 and good for all population groups. We rated the practice requires improvement for well led.

We saw that improvements had been made to address issues with staffing levels, patient and staff involvement and culture and there was an action plan to address areas still requiring improvements, however, the changes were not yet fully embedded.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm. However, we found that some improvements were needed to the arrangements for emergency medicines.
  • There had been a significant turnover of nursing staff in the three months prior to the inspection.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • 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.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care. However, we found that changes implemented and proposed were not yet fully embedded into practice.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Review and improve the approach for investigation of incidents.
  • Review and improve the arrangements for choice and storage of emergency medicines.
  • Review and improve the process for clinical audits.
  • Review and improve mechanisms for staff involvement and decision making.
  • Review and improve the staff establishment.

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