We carried out a review of the data available to us about Brannel 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 Brannel Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced focussed inspection at Brannel Surgery on 14 November 2019 as part of our inspection programme.
We carried out an inspection of this service following our annual review of the information available to us including information provided by the practice. Our review indicated that there may have been a significant change (either deterioration or improvement) to the quality of care provided since the last inspection.
This inspection focused on the following key questions:
Because of the assurance received from our review of information we carried forward the ratings for the following key questions:
We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:
We have rated this practice as good for providing effective, responsive and well led services because:
We rated all population groups as good.
The areas where the provider should make improvements are:
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
Brannel Surgery was inspected on Wednesday 4 February 2015. This was a comprehensive inspection.
We found the practice to be good for providing well-led, safe, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for the six population groups.
Our key findings were as follows:
There were systems in place to address incidents, deal with complaints and protect adults, children and other vulnerable people who use the service. Significant events were recorded and shared with multi professional agencies. There was a proven track record and a culture of promptly responding to incidents and near misses and using these events to learn and change systems changed so that patient care could be improved.
There were systems in place to support the GPs and other clinical staff to improve clinical outcomes for patients. According to data from the Quality and Outcomes Framework (the annual reward and incentive programme detailing GP practice achievement results) outcomes for patients registered with this practice were equal to or above average for the locality. Patient care and treatment was considered in line with best practice national guidelines and staff are proactive in promoting good health. There were sufficiently skilled and trained staff working at the practice.
The practice was pro-active in obtaining as much information as possible about their patients which does or could affect their health and wellbeing. Staff knew the practice patients well, are able to identify people in crisis and are professional and respectful when providing care and treatment.
The practice planned its services to meet the diversity of its patients. There were good facilities available, adjustments were made to meet the needs of the patients and there was an effective appointment system in place which enabled a good access to the service.
The practice had a vision and informal set of values which were understood by staff. There were clear clinical governance systems and a clear leadership structure in place.
We found an outstanding area of practice:
There were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements.
The provider should:
Chief Inspector of General Practice