The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Dr Gigurawa Wijethilleke

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Medicare Unit, 1 Croston Road, Lostock Hall, Preston, Lancashire, PR5 5RS (01772) 330724

Provided and run by:
Dr Gigurawa Wijethilleke

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

All Inspections

18 January 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Gigurawa Wijethilleke’s practice on 29 September 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good with the key question of safe rated as requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the September 2016 inspection can be found by on our website at http://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-510297930/reports.

This inspection was a desk-based review carried out on 18 January 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in regulations that we identified in our previous inspection on 29 September 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

Overall the practice is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • At the inspection in September 2016 we found that the practice was reliant on the use of a defibrillator situated in a public area close to the practice. At this desk-based review we saw evidence that the practice had purchased a defibrillator for themselves.
  • At our previous inspection, we identified that the surgery did not have a legionella risk assessment for the building (legionella is a term for a particular bacterium which can contaminate water systems in buildings). For this inspection, the practice provided evidence to show that a legionella risk assessment had been conducted and necessary control measures had been put in place and were being carried out.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

29 September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Gigurawa Wijethilleke’s practice on 29 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.
  • Lessons were shared to make sure action was taken to improve safety in the practice although the practice did not review outcomes of the actions taken.
  • Risks to patients were generally assessed and well managed although there was no legionella risk assessment for the building (legionella is a term for a particular bacterium which can contaminate water systems in buildings). Also, the practice had never carried out any fire drills.
  • The practice had arrangements in place to respond to emergencies and major incidents, however, the practice did not have a defibrillator.
  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems, processes and practices in place to keep patients safe and safeguarded from abuse. Staff who acted as chaperones were trained for the role although one of these staff had not received a DBS check or been risk assessed for the role. (DBS checks identify whether a person has a criminal record or is on an official list of people barred from working in roles where they may have contact with children or adults who may be vulnerable.)
  • 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 the 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.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Complete a risk assessment for legionella at the surgery.
  • Identify and assess the risks associated with the absence of a defibrillator in the surgery building.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • The practice should consider putting systems in place to check that actions identified by significant event reports are effective.
  • Allow for recruitment arrangements to include all necessary employment checks for all staff. For example, Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks or risk assessments for all staff including those providing a chaperone service for patients.
  • Consider undertaking regular fire drills to test full evacuation of the building in the event of a fire.


Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

21 February 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

During our last inspection on 17 May 2013 we had found concerns in relation to the cleanliness and infection control procedures, checks on staff employed by the practice as well as the systems in place to monitor the quality of service the provided. We had asked the provider to take action.

During this inspection we spoke with two patients who were waiting to be seen by the doctor. All comments made to us were positive with the exception of one comment made around chaperone procedures which were addressed at the time with the practice manager.

We spoke with the new practice manager who had only been in post since 17 February 2014 and examined records.

We found the premises to be clean in all areas. Cleaning schedules were in place and the practice manager was the lead for infection control. Outstanding issues from an infection control audit completed prior to registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) had been addressed.

All new staff had provided the required documentation before being employed by the practice. Relevant checks on staff who had direct contact with patients had been completed and where these had been deemed not to be necessary suitable risk assessments were in place.

The practice had improved the systems in place to monitor the quality and effectiveness of services provided to its patients.

17 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We were able to speak with four 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, 'I have faith in the doctor', whilst another said, 'The doctor understands and takes their time, even when they are busy." Most of the patients we spoke with confirmed that they felt confident that the doctor understood their condition. One patient told us, "An outstanding feature of the practice is the patience and competence of the doctor.' Another person told us, 'I usually have no problem getting an appointment; they are very good with me and always accommodate my request.'

We looked at the practice regarding their compliance to infection control guidelines. We found there were no systems in place that ensured that the practice was clean. There were also outstanding issues with regards to recommendations in a recent infection control audit undertaken by the PCT.

The practice participates in the Quality and Outcomes Framework system used to monitor the quality of services in GP practices. We saw that the practice had achieved a high score in their last QOF round. However we did not see a programme of systematic audits undertaken which would show how the practice monitored the quality and effectiveness of services provided to its patients.