The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Medici Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

3 Windsor Street, Luton, Bedfordshire, LU1 3UA 0844 387 8910

Provided and run by:
The Medici Medical Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Medici Medical Practice 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 The Medici Medical Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

7 August 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced focused inspection at The Medici Medical Practice on 30 October 2019, as part of our inspection programme, following our annual review of the information available to us.

The practice was rated as good overall; however, we found a breach of regulations which meant the practice was rated requires improvement for providing safe services.

The report for the October 2019 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for The Medici Medical Practice on our website at

This inspection carried out on 07 August was a desk-based review to confirm that the practice had carried out its plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breach of regulations that we identified at our previous inspection in October 2019.

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • information sent to us from the provider.
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services

We rated the practice as good for providing safe services because:

  • An action plan had been put in place to make improvements to the practice.
  • The practice had systems in place for the appropriate and safe use of medicines. For example,
    • A log was in place to track the use of blank prescriptions.
    • Patient group directions (PGDs) had been authorised. A PGD was available for the administration of the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination.
    • Appropriate monitoring was in place for patients’ health in relation to the use of medicines.
    • A risk assessment had been completed to determine which emergency medicines were held in the practice.

Additionally, where we previously told the practice they should make improvements our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice had a copy of the legionella risk assessment completed by the landlord of the building and had assured themselves that mitigating actions had been completed.
  • A needlestick protocol was readily available in each clinical room to direct staff on immediate actions to take in the event of a needlestick injury.
  • An exception reporting protocol had been implemented for the Quality and Outcomes Framework. One of the GP partners monitored the exception reporting. We were informed that patients were contacted three times by letter, telephone or text message prior to exception.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

30 October 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Medici Medical Practice on 30 October 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

We decided to undertake an inspection of this service following our annual review of the information available to us. This inspection looked at the following key questions:

  • Safe
  • Effective
  • Well-led

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We have rated this practice as good overall and good for all population groups, except working age people (including those recently retired and students) which is rated as requires improvement.

We rated the practice as requires improvement for providing safe services because:

  • The systems in place for the appropriate and safe use of medicine were not always sufficient or followed. For example,
    • A record was not kept of blank prescriptions held by the practice.
    • Some of the patient group directions (PGDs) had not been authorised.
    • Some patients who were prescribed high risk medicines did not have appropriate blood monitoring.
    • Some recommended emergency medicines were not held in the practice and there was no risk assessment in place to mitigate this.
  • We were informed that a legionella risk assessment had been completed by the landlord of the building. The practice did not have oversight of the assessment.
  • Information was not readily available in the consultation and treatment rooms to direct staff on immediate actions to take in the event of a needle stick injury.

We rated the practice as good for providing effective services because:

  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • The practice had taken part in national initiatives to improve patient care. Single cycle audits had been undertaken. The second cycles had not yet been completed.
  • Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) data showed the practice was performing comparably with others locally. However, exception reporting was high in some areas.
  • The practice’s uptake for cervical screening and baby immunisations was below national targets. However, measures had been put in place to encourage increased uptake in these areas.

We rated the practice as good for providing well-led services because:

  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The practice used health care professionals other than GPs to meet the needs of their patients.
  • Staff reported they were supported by the GP partners and managers in the practice.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.

(Please see the specific details on action required at the end of this report).

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Assure themselves that the legionella risk assessment has been completed by the landlord and any mitigating actions are completed.
  • Provide readily available information to direct staff on immediate actions to take in the event of a needlestick injury.
  • Review exception reporting processes to ensure appropriate measures have been taken to review patients.
  • Continue to encourage the uptake of cervical screening and baby immunisations.
  • Complete the second cycle of audits undertaken to demonstrate quality improvements.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

27 November 2014

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Medici Medical Practice on 27 November 2014. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing well-led, effective, caring and responsive services.

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

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns, and to report incidents and near misses. Information about safety was recorded, monitored, appropriately reviewed and addressed.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • 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.

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

Importantly the provider should:

  • Display signage in different languages in the reception area which informs patients of the translation service available.
  • Develop a more systematic approach to conditions such as diabetes, mental health including physical health, depression and hypertension to achieve and demonstrate improved health outcomes in these areas.
  • Ensure that systems to identify children and vulnerable adults are known and used by all staff.
  • Ensure that all staff receive training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
  • Ensure that all staff complete the safeguarding training as arranged.
  • Ensure that medicines which are not for use in emergency are stored in a locked cupboard
  • Ensure that infection control cleaning schedules and audit are updated and completed as planned.
  • Ensure that fire training is completed for all staff as arranged.
  • Ensure that audit cycles are complete having been reviewed and revisited to determine if actions have been effective.
  • Ensure that all staff receive infection control update training
  • Ensure that infection control cleaning schedules and audit is updated and completed as planned.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 February 2014

During a routine inspection

During our visit we met with the practice manager and one of the GP partners. We spoke with five people and four members of staff. People told us they understood the care and treatment choices available to them. We observed reception staff offering a choice of dates and times for appointments. We saw that when people required hospital care and treatment they were referred promptly.

People we spoke with were happy with the care and treatment they received. One person said, 'I am very happy here. I always get an appointment and don't have to wait long." Another said, 'I get treated with respect when I am seen.'

We found that staff were recruited using safe recruitment processes. Staff told us they felt supported to carry out their role and we saw that staff received training that was relevant to their role.

People were asked for their views and they were acted upon. We saw that some patient satisfaction surveys had identified getting through on the telephone as an issue. We were told that this was being looked in to so that people could benefit from the quicker answering of calls.