The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Fulham Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

446 Fulham Road, Fulham, London, SW6 1BG (020) 7385 6001

Provided and run by:
The Fulham Medical Centre

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 Fulham Medical Centre 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 Fulham Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

13 September 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about The Fulham Medical Centre on 13 September 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.

12 September 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Fulham Medical Centre on 3 December 2015. The practice was rated requires improvement for safe, with the overall rating for the practice being good. The full comprehensive report can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Fulham Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We carried out this announced follow up comprehensive inspection on 12 September 2017. Overall the practice is now rated as good in all domains.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The practice had clearly defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment. .
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients we spoke with 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.
  • 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 the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

The areas where the practice should make improvements are:

  • Review the patient feedback including the results of the national GP patient survey in relation to the practices opening hours and getting through to the practice by phone, with a view to improving the service.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

3 December 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Fulham Medical Centre on 3 December 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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 who used services were assessed and managed. However, the systems and processes to address these risks were not implemented well enough to ensure patients were kept safe. There were some deficiencies in the arrangements for infection control, accessibility of emergency equipment and the management of prescriptions; and there were shortcomings in the practice’s recruitment processes.

  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had 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.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that 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.
  • 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 complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure patients are fully protected against the risks associated with the recruitment of staff; in particular in ensuring all appropriate pre-employment reference checks are carried out and recorded in staff records.

In addition, the areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Put in place formal annual infection control audits.

  • Review the key holder arrangements to ensure emergency medicines are readily accessible at all times.

  • Ensure a record of prescription pads batch numbers is kept to maintain prescription security.

  • Display information in the patient waiting area about: how to complain; and the practice’s mission statement.

  • Continue to pursue ongoing action to improve telephone access to appointments.

  • Undertake and document a risk assessment of the need to provide an AED.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice