The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Bradshaw Medical Partnership

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Bradshaw Medical Centre, Wigan, Greater Manchester, WN5 0AB (01942) 483900

Provided and run by:
Bradshaw Medical Partnership

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

1 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Bradshaw Medical Partnership on 1 November 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.

27 October 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out our first announced comprehensive inspection at Bradshaw Medical Partnership on 10 October 2016 and the practice was rated as requires improvement overall. The areas where the provider was required to make improvements related to the safe and well led domains. The full comprehensive report following that inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Bradshaw Medical Partnership on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We carried out a further announced comprehensive inspection at Bradshaw Medical Partnership on 04 April 2017 to check that the practice had made improvements. Improvements were demonstrated in some areas but further improvements were required to evidence that systems were embedded in the responsive and well led domains. Overall the practice remained rated as requires improvement and they submitted an action plan after the inspection demonstrating how they would address the issues.

On 27 October 2017 we went back to check that the continuing issues relating to the responsive and well led domains had been addressed. At that inspection on 27 October we found that the practice had reviewed their complaints procedure and embedded policies and procedures to ensure they were being followed. The practice is now rated as good.

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

  • There was a leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from patients, which it acted on. There was now a formal mechanism to obtain feedback from staff.
  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment. A mechanism to record and monitor all staff training, including clinical staff, was in place.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements had been made to the quality of care as a result of historic complaints and concerns. There was now a system to formally record and monitor verbal comments and concerns. This had been recently introduced and was now effective.
  • The practice was able to demonstrate that staff complied with the requirements relating to complaints and we saw formal documented evidence to support complaints received. Staff, including medical staff, were aware of the term Duty of Candour.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

5 April 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out our first announced comprehensive inspection at Bradshaw Medical Partnership on 10 October 2016 and the practice was rated as requires improvement overall. The areas where the provider was required to make improvements related to the safe and well led domains. The full comprehensive report following that inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Bradshaw Medical Partnership on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We carried out this announced comprehensive inspection at Bradshaw Medical Partnership on 04 April 2017 to check that the practice had made improvement. Improvements were demonstrated in some areas but further improvements were required to evidence that systems were embedded. Overall the practice remains rated as requires improvement.

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

  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were appropriately supported, treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • The practice demonstrated that vulnerable people in particular were very well supported. The services provided by two members of staff continued to ensure that vulnerable patients, such as those with learning disabilities, mental health issues, carers, bereaved patients/family and patients with dementia received responsive and effective support.
  • The carers’ register was regularly updated and identified patients who were currently carers and those who were cared for. Each carer received a minimum of 30 minutes consultation and this was carried out either at the practice or at home if necessary.
  • Patients that provided feedback said there was continuity of care and we saw that urgent appointments were available the same day at the practice. Patients could also attend the Wigan borough-wide Hub when the practice was closed.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance and they followed it accordingly.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from patients, which it acted on. There was no formal mechanism to obtain feedback from staff.
  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment. A mechanism to record and monitor all staff training, including clinical staff, was required.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements had been made to the quality of care as a result of historic complaints and concerns. Our inspection of 10 October 2016 highlighted that there was no system to formally record and monitor verbal comments and concerns. This had been recently introduced but was not effective.
  • The practice was able to demonstrate that they complied with the requirements relating thereto although formal documented evidence was limited, specifically in relation to responses to complaints. Not all staff, including medical staff, were aware of the term Duty of Candour.

We found areas where the provider must make improvements. The provider must :

  • Ensure the overarching governance framework supports the systems to assess, monitor and mitigate risks and ensure that staff understand their lead roles and follow all protocols in place.
  • Ensure that documentary evidence is kept, specifically in relation to complaints, comments and concerns.

We found areas where the provider should make improvements. The provider should :

  • Review the mechanism to record and monitor staff training, specifically in relation to clinical staff.
  • Review the mechanism to document and discuss all incidents as per the practice protocol.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

10 October 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Bradshaw Medical Centre on 10th October 2016. Overall the practice is rated as Requires Improvement.

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

  • The practice had recently started to carry out analysis of significant events.

  • Staff did not fully understand their responsibilities to raise concerns, and did not always report incidents and near misses. There were inconsistencies about who was the safeguarding lead.

  • Risks to patients were not always assessed and well managed. We identified a health and safety risk to patients around the dangers of liquid nitrogen that the practice was not aware of. We advised the practice to immediately assess and eliminate the risk.
  • 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.
  • The practice used the carers’ register to pro-actively support carers. Each carer received a minimum of 30 minutes consultation and this was carried out either at the practice or at home if necessary

  • The services provided by two members of staff ensured that vulnerable patients, such as those with learning disabilities, mental health issues, carers, bereaved patients/family and patients with dementia received responsive and effective support.

  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand and patients received an appropriate response if they made a formal complaint. There was no system to report and record verbal comments and concerns.
  • 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.
  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • There was a leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. Staff were inconsistent about who held lead roles. Where staff worked in isolation there was no formal mentorship to ensure staff were working within their competencies.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour. However, staff were not aware of all their responsibilities in this regard such as reporting incidents.

We found areas where the provider must make improvements. The provider must :

  • Introduce formal processes for reporting, reviewing acting upon significant events and incidents and monitoring safety.

  • Ensure that protocols and guidance available for staff are understood in order to manage their responsibilities in a safe and effective way such as managing infection control and reporting incidents.

  • Ensure that systems to address and manage risks are sufficiently implemented in relation to health and safety, specifically liquid nitrogen

We found areas where the provider should make improvements. The provider should :

  • Review the process to communicate patient safety alerts and other guidance.

  • Introduce a system to record and monitor verbal comments and concerns.

  • Monitor that staff are aware of their own and other’s lead roles and responsibilities and assess that they are working within their competencies.

  • Continue to formalise the meeting structure so that all staff are kept up to date with relevant information.

  • Complete the appraisal programme.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice