The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Dr Ruth O'Hare Also known as Connaught Square Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

41 Connaught Square, London, W2 2HL (020) 7402 4026

Provided and run by:
Dr Ruth O'Hare

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

All Inspections

5 May 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Ruth O’Hare also known as The Connaught Square Practice on 5 May 2015.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well- led services. It was good for providing services for older people, people with long term conditions, families, children and young people, working age people, people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There were processes in place to report and discuss significant events and incidents and staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns.
  • There were processes in place to safeguard vulnerable adults and children.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was delivered following best practice guidance.
  • Patients said they were treated with kindness, dignity and respect and were involved in decisions about their care.
  • Patients were generally satisfied with the appointment system and found it easy to make an appointment.
  • Staff felt supported by the practice management and they were encouraged to maintain their clinical professional development through training.
  • The practice demonstrated evidence of listening to patient feedback and made improvements to service as a result of this.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

The provider should:

  • Document learning points and action plans to improve future practice for all significant events recorded and discussed.
  • Document learning points and action plans to improve future practice for all complaints recorded and discussed.
  • Ensure that infection control audits are completed in line with best practice guidance.
  • Ensure newly appointed staff completes role appropriate training in basic life support and safe guarding vulnerable adults and children.
  • Ensure that annual appraisals are completed for all administration and nursing staff to support their professional development.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

18 August 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out our inspection of 18 August 2014 to follow up non-compliance with the three regulations we identified at our previous inspection on 22 November 2013. In particular, the provider was not meeting the standards for the care and welfare of service users, assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision and complaints.

At out latest inspection we found the provider was now meetings the standards for assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision and complaints.

The provider had made some improvements in the care and welfare of service users. Controlled drugs were no longer stored at the practice. There were now effective arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. There was better information and recording of chronic disease management and medication reviews. The follow up of test results with patients was being managed more effectively. There was some improvement in the management of patient referrals and clearer staff understanding of their responsibilities for this.

However, some of the shortcomings in the recording of information on patients' records found at the previous inspection had not been addressed sufficiently to demonstrate that the provider was meeting the standards required for care and welfare of patients. The records of patients' care and treatment were still not always complete and discussions and consultations not fully reflected in the plans for their treatment over the coming months.

We spoke with three patients who attended the service for treatment on the day of the inspection. They were mostly positive about the service they received. One patient said, 'All my care is fully explained and the doctors and nurses give me adequate time when I come for an appointment.' Another told us, 'I like the practice and have never had a problem here.' When asked if there were any improvements the practice could make, one patient told us it would be helpful if the staff wore name badges because there have been a lot of staff changes and they did not know all of them or what they did.

22 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two patients during our visit. Both patients were satisfied with the service they received. A comment we received included "it's a good practice." We observed patients being treated with dignity and respect. A patient commented that staff were "polite and friendly." Whilst people's needs were assessed their care was not always planned in a way to ensure their safety and welfare. Where people had, had a chronic disease review there was a lack of documented evidence to show that a treatment plan had been developed to manage their condition for the coming months. The record of people's care and treatment were not always complete. There was a procedure for dealing with a medical emergency, however the relevant emergency equipment was not available. Patients were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. We also looked at people's comments on the NHS Choices website. We noted that the provider had not responded to negative comments . The outcome from the last Patient Participation Group was also available online. There were poor systems in place to monitor the quality of service people received, there were no clear mechanisms in place to show how the practice used monitoring information to improve the service provided. A complaints procedure was in place however not all complaints were investigated.