The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Guy Barrington Staight - Pelham Street

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2 Pelham Street, London, SW7 2NG (020) 7581 4222

Provided and run by:
Guy Barrington Staight

All Inspections

5 December 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

Guy Barrington Staight - Pelham Street (also known as The Staight Practice) is a private doctors service.

The service has a Registered Manager. A Registered Manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Staight Practice on 5 December 2022 as part of our inspection programme.

Our key findings were:

  • Systems, processes and practices were not always appropriate. For example, the service did not have written protocols for checking emergency medicines, blood pathology test results or for ensuring safe storage of vaccines.
  • Periodic Infection Prevention and Control Audits were not being undertaken. When this was highlighted, the service took prompt action and undertook an Infection Prevention and Control Risk Assessment. However, this lacked sufficient detail.
  • People had comprehensive assessments of their needs, which included consideration of clinical needs, mental health, physical health and wellbeing.
  • There were clearly defined and embedded systems and processes to keep patients safeguarded from abuse.
  • The service was tailored to meet patients’ needs and delivered in a way to ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care.
  • We saw evidence of quality improvement activity. For example, a recent clinical audit had been undertaken and all relevant staff were involved. Opportunities to participate in peer review were also proactively pursued.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Undertake a comprehensive infection prevention and control audit; enabling it to identify and act on infection risks.
  • Introduce a written cold chain policy; outlining its stock control protocol and actions to be undertaken should its vaccines fridge temperature fall outside the required range.
  • Introduce periodic checks of emergency medicines and equipment, so as to ensure their availability in the event of a medical emergency.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Continue to liaise with its Landlord in respect of addressing risks identified in a February 2022 and subsequent Fire Risk Assessments.
  • Take action to monitor recently introduced protocols governing the safe management of blood pathology results.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

12 February 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 12 February 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 services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

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

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led services 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.

CQC inspected the service on 14 November and 6 December 2017 and asked the provider to make improvements to address breaches of regulations 12 (Safe care and treatment), 17 (Good governance) and 18 (Staffing). We checked these areas as part of this comprehensive inspection and found this had been resolved.

Guy Barrington Staight - Pelham Street (also known as The Staight Practice) is a private doctors service.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some general exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of service and these are set out in Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At The Staight Practice services are provided to patients under arrangements made by their employer with whom the service user holds a policy (other than a standard health insurance policy). These types of arrangements are exempt by law from CQC regulation. Therefore, at The Staight Practice, we were only able to inspect the services which are not arranged for patients by their employers with whom the patient holds a policy (other than a standard health insurance policy. The lead doctor is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Forty-nine people provided feedback about the service by completing comments cards. The feedback was entirely positive about the practice, its staff and the care and treatment received

Our key findings were:

  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients’ feedback indicated they were satisfied with care and treatment, facilities and staff at the practice.
  • The practice ensured that care and treatment information was appropriately shared when people moved between services. When patient consent, their NHS GP if they had one was kept informed of the care and treatment they received.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement among the clinical staff, and learning and development had improved among non-clinical staff since our last inspection.

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

Review their arrangements to ensure staff continue to receive the training and professional development that are necessary for them to carry out their role and responsibilities.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

14 November 2017 and 6 December 2017

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 14 November 2017 and 6 December 2017 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. We carried out two announced visits to this location as part of this inspection due to an unexpected absence from the inspection team on the first visit. We carried out a second visit in order to complete the inspection. 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.

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was not providing safe services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was not providing effective services 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 services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was not providing well-led services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Guy Barrington Staight - Pelham Street (also known as The Staight Practice) is a private doctor’s practice situated close to South Kensington tube station. The practice premises are located within a building that is primarily made up of residential apartments. The practice premises are located below street level and accessible via stairs only. The practice offers general medical services to adults and children, usually between 8.30am and 6.30pm on Mondays to Fridays. There are three general practitioners, two are part-time. One of the three practitioners is female. The GPs are supported by a technician who is a former nurse and a team of three administrators and receptionist. There are other services provided from the location, but these are out of scope for CQC registration including occupational health services provided to employees under arrangements made by their employer. Consultations and treatments are also provided by a physiotherapist, clinical psychologist, a nutritionist and podiatrist, all of which are exempt from CQC regulation.

The lead GP is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Forty three people provided feedback about the service by completing comments cards. The feedback was entirely positive about the practice, its staff and the care and treatment received. We also spoke with six patients during our inspection, who all also gave entirely positive feedback about the practice.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients’ feedback indicated they were satisfied with care and treatment, facilities and staff at the practice.
  • The practice ensured that care and treatment information was appropriately shared when people moved between services. When patient consent, their NHS GP if they had one was kept informed of the care and treatment they received.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement among the clinical staff.

We identified regulations that were not being met and the provider must:

  • Ensure care and treatment must be provided in a safe way for service users
  • Ensure they have suitable systems and processes in place that assess, monitor and mitigate any risks relating the health, safety and welfare of people using services and others
  • Ensure staff receive the support, training, professional development, supervision and appraisals that are necessary for them to carry out their role and responsibilities.

You can see full details of the regulations not being met at the end of this report.

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

  • Review their arrangements to meet the needs of patients whose first language was not English, make clear the physical access restrictions on their website and consider how to make improvements to support the service accessibility to patients with sensory deprivation. The provider should consider a Disability Access Assessment.

18 July 2013

During a routine inspection

We were unable to speak to people during the inspection however we have used their feedback and comments from the provider's most recent satisfaction survey. People rated the care and treatment highly and their comments included "First class doctor. The best I have experienced" and "I go out of my way to see this doctor".

We found people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual wishes. Consultations were held in private and the findings were recorded at the time in people's medical records.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and staff were trained to deal with medical emergencies and in basic life support. The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.