We carried out a review of the data available to us about Lindfield 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 Lindfield Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of this practice on 7 April 2016. Breaches of Regulatory requirements were found during that inspection within the safe domain. After the comprehensive inspection, the practice sent us an action plan detailing what they would do to meet the regulatory responsibilities in relation to the following:
We undertook this focused desktop inspection on 25 October 2016 to check that the provider had followed their action plan and to confirm that they now met regulatory requirements. A desktop inspection is when we request information from the registered provider to check that they have taken action to meet regulations without a visit to the location.
This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements. You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the 'all reports' link for Lindfield Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
This report should be read in conjunction with the last report published in August 2016.
Our key findings across the areas we inspected were as follows:-
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice
We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Lindfield Medical Centre on 7 April 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.
Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:
The areas where the provider must make improvement are:
The areas where the provider should make improvement are:
Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP)
Chief Inspector of General Practice
During our inspection we spoke with five members of staff, including GPs, nurses and the practice manager.
We found that people were protected from abuse through the provision of suitable training of staff, the presence of clear policies and the availability of information to staff and people who use the service.
We found that whilst some action had been taken regarding staff training the provider was not compliant with the regulations.
We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of patients who used the service. We spent time talking with patients and observing interaction between staff and patients. We reviewed records and systems and looked at the environment and how this impacted on the service delivery.
We spoke with seven patients who had attended the practice on the day of the inspection. We spoke with a GP partner, a practice nurse, two reception staff and the practice manager.
Patient's feedback told us that they were happy with the care and service provided by the practice. One person said, 'I cannot fault the practice in any way.'
Patients told us that their privacy and dignity was well respected, they had time to discuss their health care issues, and had been fully involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.
We looked at the processes that the practice had in place to ensure the patients were protected from abuse. These processes had not ensured that all staff received appropriate training on all safeguarding issues. Staff spoken with understood that any suspicion of abuse needed to be reported.
Staff told us that they had training and development opportunities and they were well supported by the provider. We saw evidence of training undertaken and planned training.
The practice had procedures in place to review the quality of the service provided. These processes had ensured information provided was used to improve the service.