Archived: The Globe Town Surgery

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection November 2014 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Globe Town Surgery on 6 November 2017. The practice was previously inspected in November 2014. All key questions were rated as good and this inspection was to ensure that the practice were maintaining standards. At that inspection there were a small number of areas identified that the provider needed to improve and we found these had been addressed.

At this inspection we found:

• The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence based guidelines.

• Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

• The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen, although we found the arrangements for the storage and access to drugs and equipment for managing medical emergencies, across both the main site and branch surgery needed to be reviewed as equipment was not clearly labelled and the right equipment was not easily identifiable in an emergency.

• When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.

• Patients found the appointment system easy to use but feedback from the GP survey suggested that they were not always able to access care when they needed it. Patients could also make appointments or consult a GP online.

• The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation, although not all staff had received an annual appraisal.

• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
• The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.
• We found the practice had not clearly displayed its previous inspection report or ratings but they confirmed they would do that without delay.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

• Review the arrangements for the storage and access to drugs and equipment for managing medical emergencies, across both the main site and branch surgery.

• Review availability of equipment to manage medical emergencies taking into account guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK).

• Review the system for staff appraisal so that all staff have an opportunity for annual appraisal.

• Review the call / recall arrangements for cervical screening to ensure responsibility for this is clear

• Review the current low number of carers identified

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice