The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr Sanjay Mittal Also known as Probert Road Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Probert Road, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV10 6UF (01902) 444035

Provided and run by:
Dr Sanjay Mittal

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr Sanjay Mittal 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 Dr Sanjay Mittal, you can give feedback on this service.

4 October 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr Sanjay Mittal on 4 October 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

25 September 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Sanjay Mittal on 31 October 2016. After the comprehensive inspection, the practice was rated as requires improvement for providing well-led services.

We issued a requirement notice in relation to:

  • Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014 Good Governance.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Dr Sanjay Mittal on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 25 September 2017 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 at our previous inspection on 31 October 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

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

  • Systems were in place to show the action taken to address alerts about medicines that may affect patients’ safety.
  • Systems to monitor children who fail to attend hospital appointments had been reviewed and procedures put in place to ensure these were appropriately managed.
  • At risk registers for children and vulnerable adults were maintained and appropriately managed.
  • Employment checks required by legislation had been completed for all staff employed.
  • The plans for ongoing clinical audits that support improvements for patients had been reviewed.
  • Arrangements to ensure the GP was actively involved in the appraisal and supervision of the advanced nurse practitioners had been introduced.
  • Systems were in place to ensure patients discharged from hospital were followed up in a timely way.
  • Plans were in place to review the reasons for lower patient satisfaction in the GP national survey for patient experience of their interaction with GPs. For example, the GP was looking at using an accredited patient satisfaction survey as part of their revalidation.
  • Pro-active plans had been introduced to identify carers and establishing what support they need. The number of carers identified remained just under 1% but had increased from 30 (0.65%) to 45 (0.97%).
  • At this inspection we found that the practice had addressed all the concerns raised and is now rated as good for providing well-led services.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

31 October 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Sanjay Mittal on 31 October 2016. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • The practice offered extended opening hours two evenings a week which enabled appointments to be made outside of traditional working hours. There was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The practice was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The practice was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
  • Most risks were well managed, although action was needed in the areas of acting upon alerts about medicines.

However there were areas of practice where the provider must make improvements:

  • Implement a recorded system to demonstrate the action taken to address alerts about medicines that may affect patients’ safety.
  • Ensure national guidelines for children who do not attend for hospital events are followed.
  • Document the checks completed for the ongoing suitability of GP locums.

There were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:

  • Continue to maintain and manage at risk registers for children and vulnerable adults.
  • Consider implementing a plan for ongoing clinical audits that support improvements for patients.
  • Consider the involvement of the GP in the appraisal of the advanced nurse practitioners.
  • Ensure that patients discharged from hospital are followed up in a timely way.
  • Investigate the reasons for lower patient satisfaction in the GP national survey for patient experience of their interaction with GPs.
  • Consider pro-actively identifying carers and establishing what support they need.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice