- GP practice
Archived: Dr Ravi Sharma Also known as St Peter's Medical Practice
Important:
The provider of this service changed. See new profile
All Inspections
21 March 2017
During an inspection looking at part of the service
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Ravi Sharma on 1 September 2016. The overall rating for the practice was requires improvement. The full comprehensive report on the September 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Dr Ravi Sharma on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 21 March 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 in our previous inspection on 1 September 2016. 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.
Our key findings were as follows:
-
The practice had implemented a procedure for the monitoring and management of high risk medication and patients receiving.
-
The practice had clinical meetings in place with the nurse, GP and the long term locum.
-
The practice had an improvement plan including clinical audits.
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice
1 September 2016
During a routine inspection
Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr Ravi Sharma on 1 September 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.
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 mostly 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.
- Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and there was continuity of care, with appointments available the same day.
- The practice had good facilities and 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 provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
-
Data showed some patient outcomes were lower compared to the national average however this had been recognised and the practice were making improvements which were reflected in the 2015/16 data
-
Although some audits had been carried out, we saw no evidence that audits were driving improvements to patient outcomes.
-
There was no formal process for the review and management of those patients on high risk medication.
-
There were no clinical meetings with the nurse, GP and long term locum to ensure information was shared and patients were discussed.
The areas where the provider must make improvement are:
-
Implement a procedure for the monitoring and management of high risk medication and patients receiving them.
-
Ensure clinical meetings with the nurse, GP and long term locum take place.
The areas where the provider should make improvement are:
-
Implement a continuous programme of quality improvement including clinical audit.
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice