We carried out a review of the data available to us about Dr Sally Johnston 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 Sally Johnston, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at the practice of Dr Sally Johnston on 3 March 2017. Overall the practice is now rated as good.
The practice had been previously inspected on 20 April 2016. Following that inspection the practice was rated as requires improvement overall, with the following domain ratings:
Safe – inadequate
Effective – Good
Caring – Good
Responsive – Good
Well led – Requires improvement
The practice provided us with an action plan detailing how they were going to make the required improvements.
The inspection on 3 March 2017 was to confirm the required actions had been completed and award a new rating if appropriate.
Following this re-inspection on 3 March 2017, our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
Chief Inspector of General Practice
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Riddings Family Health Centre on 20 April 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
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. There were no recorded complaints and we were told that none had ever been received.
Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs with the exception of chaperones.
Data showed patient outcomes and patient satisfaction was high compared to the local and national averages. A clinical audit was undertaken annually and further monitoring of services was undertaken on an as and when basis. We saw that some changes were made to improve outcomes for patients such as changes in medication.
Staff said that they understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses but we did not see evidence that this was consistent. Staff described incidents that had not been recorded.
The practice presented three clinical incidents in the past twelve months. They had been investigated and actioned appropriately. They were discussed informally with clinical colleagues if felt appropriate.
Clinical risks to patients were assessed and well managed, but environmental risks such as those relating to health and safety, fire safety and staff training were not.
The practice had a number of policies and procedures to govern activity, but some were overdue a review.
The lead GP took the lead for all aspects of the practice, clinical and managerial, and staff said they felt supported by management. There was no evidence that the practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients.
The areas where the provider must make improvements are:
Formalise the reporting, recording and investigation of all incidents and document action taken to improve safety and continuous learning.
Encourage and monitor formal and informal verbal and written comments and complaints.
Ensure recruitment arrangements cover all necessary employment checks for all staff including locum staff.
Ensure fire safety within the environment.
Monitor the learning needs of all reception/administration staff and identify and monitor training and development plans.
Carry out all appropriate health and safety risk assessments.
In addition the provider should:
Review the chaperone policy
Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice
The practice operated by appointment only. All the staff and patients we spoke with told us, appointments could usually be made on the day and it was rare patients waited more than 24 hours for an appointment.
We saw the practice leaflet which contained useful information for patients about the practice, including details of the services available and how to access GP services both in and out of hours.
The practice had electronic records in place to accurately record the contact patients had with the service. We looked at six electronic records; these included personal details, allergies, past medical history, choice of treatments available, test results and referral letters as well as contact with other professionals.
All areas of the practise were clean, tidy and well maintained. The five people we spoke to were all happy with the cleanliness of the practice.
During our visit we found the practice had systems to assess and monitor quality. The practice had a range of policies and procedures in place for staff to access, which supported the safe running of the service.