Plashet Harmony Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

At this assessment, we looked at two quality statements in the Safe key domain. We looked at the learning culture of the service and if the practice were delivering safe systems, pathways and transitions.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events.

From our review of significant events and complaints, we were satisfied learning from incidents and complaints resulted in changes that improved care for others. Learning from incidents was documented and resulted in changes that reduced the risk of recurrence.

Staff members we spoke to felt supported to raise concerns and told us the management team treated them with compassion and understanding. Staff felt there was an open culture, and that safety was a top priority. The provider had processes for staff to report incidents, near misses and safety events. There was a system to record and investigate complaints, and when things went wrong, staff apologised and gave people support.

Representatives from the Patient Participation Group (PPG) felt the provider took concerns seriously and proactively made improvements to the service.

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

We found the practices’ system to manage prescriptions were effective. There was a system to ensure referrals to specialist services were documented, contained the required information and to monitor urgent referrals and delays. The practice had a system to monitor the uptake of referrals. The practice had referral leads and performed regular audits for two-week wait referrals. As part of the assessment, we reviewed clinical records on the practices’ database and found no issues relating to referral timeliness. A review of the pathology results and workflow tasks, including fast-track referrals, demonstrated they were dealt with promptly.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.