Background to this inspection
Updated
21 April 2020
Seymour House Surgery provides primary medical services in 154 Sheen Road, Richmond, Surrey TW9 1UU to approximately 14000 patients and is one of 27 practices in Richmond Clinical Commissioning Group
(CCG). In addition to the main site, the practice also has a branch site in 55A Lock Road, Richmond, Surrey, TW10 7LJ.
The clinical team at the surgery is made up of four full-time GP partners (three male and one female), onefull time and three part-time salaried GPs (two male and two female), four-part-time female practice nurses, two part-time healthcare assistants and a phlebotomist. The non-clinical practice team consists of a managing partner and 19 administrative or reception staff members. The practice population is in the second least deprived decile in England. The practice population of children is below the CCG (Clinical Commissioning Group) average and the national averages and the practice population of older people is above the CCG and below the national averages.
The provider is registered as a partnership with the Care Quality Commission to provide the regulated activities of diagnostic and screening procedures, family planning, maternity and midwifery services, surgical procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury.
Updated
21 April 2020
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Seymour House Surgery on 3 March 2020 as a follow up of our inspection carried out in September 2019.
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 families, children and young people which we have rated as requires improvement.
We found that:
• The systems and processes in place to keep patients safe were adequate and the practice has a clear system in place to manage patients on high risk medicines.
• All staff had completed safeguarding training.
• Staff were aware of the process for managing significant events and sufficient detail was recorded to enable processes and the service as a whole to be improved.
• Performance indicators for patients with childhood immunisation rates and were below targets. The practice was working to address this and this was evidenced by the improvements demonstrated by unvalidated data following various approaches towards communication and information for parents.
• Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
• 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.
• Complaints information was readily available for patients.
• The leadership governance and culture supported the delivery of high-quality person-centred care.
• The arrangement for governance and performance management were clear and operated effectively.
• There was action taken in response to feedback from staff and patients.
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