The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Archived: The Basil Street Practice

3 Basil Street, London, SW3 1AU (020) 7235 6642

Provided and run by:
Dr Christopher Powell-Brett

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

All Inspections

15 January 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 15 January 2019 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

The Basil Street Practice is an independent health service based in Knightsbridge, where general practitioner services are provided to people of all ages.

Our key findings were:

  • Systems were in place to keep patients safe and safeguarded from abuse, but the policy did not include the name of the lead member of staff.
  • There were systems to keep staff up to date with evidence based practice.
  • There was a programme of quality improvement.
  • No complaints had been received in the last 18 months.
  • All members of staff were up-to-date with training relevant to their role.
  • Systems were in place to protect the personal information of patients.
  • There were comprehensive risk assessments to mitigate current and future risk.
  • The significant events process had flaws.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Review the significant event process to ensure that all significant events are documented and learning is effectively shared.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

19 February 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who used the service, looked at letters received and the 2012 feedback surveys for two GPs. People were satisfied with the care and treatment they had received. One person had written "thank you for looking after me so well" and another person told us that their GP was "reassuring". People felt they had been given sufficient information and that their GP had explained their diagnosis and treatment options well.

People were always assessed and treated by a GP and received further tests or were referred to a specialist, if required. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and to ensure people could access a GP out of hours.

The necessary pre-employment checks had been carried out on staff who worked at the practice. There was a child protection policy in place, but no policy in relation to safeguarding vulnerable adults. However, staff were aware of their responsibilities and were able to provide examples of when they had had a concern and the action they had taken.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided. Feedback surveys had been conducted and audits were carried out to ensure records were up to date and that test results had been followed up appropriately. Practice meetings took place regularly and were minuted.