We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at South Saxon House Surgery on 27 September 2017. The overall rating for the practice was good. The practice was also rated good for the effective, caring, responsive and well-led domains and all of the population groups. It was however rated as requires improvement for the safe domain. The full comprehensive report on the September 2017 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for South Saxon House Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 8 February 2018 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 27 September 2017. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.
Overall the practice is now rated as good.
At our inspection of 27 September 2017, we found that:
-
The system for recording and monitoring Medicines & Healthcare products
Regulatory Agency
(MHRA) alerts did not ensure that clinical action was always taken.
-
Not all external storage bins containing clinical waste were kept locked at all times.
-
Batch numbers, expiry dates and amounts used were not always recorded when local anaesthetic was used during minor surgical procedures.
At this inspection our key findings were as follows:
-
The systems for recording MHRA and other alerts ensured that the alerts and actions were recorded and acted upon.
-
All external clinical waste storage bins were locked at all times.
-
Batch numbers, expiry dates and amounts used were always recorded when local anaesthetic was used during minor surgical procedures.
Additionally we saw that:
-
The system for tracking and auditing histology specimens ensured that results were received and acted upon appropriately.
-
Alerts denoting a child at risk were also placed on family and other household members’ computer records as appropriate.
-
The practice had discussed areas in the GP national survey where results were below the local and national averages and were considering ways of addressing them.
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice