The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Wellside Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

45 High Street, Sawtry, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE28 5SU (01487) 830340

Provided and run by:
Wellside Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

29 March to 6 April 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced inspection at Wellside Surgery between 29 March and 6 April 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as good with the following key question ratings:

  • Safe - good
  • Effective - good
  • Caring – not inspected
  • Responsive – inspected but not rated
  • Well-led - good

Following our previous inspection on 17 July 2017, the practice was rated as good overall and for all key questions.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Wellside Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a focused inspection. We undertook this inspection at the same time as CQC inspected a range of urgent and emergency care services in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough. To understand the experience of GP providers and people who use GP services, we asked a range of questions in relation to urgent and emergency care. The responses we received have been used to inform and support system-wide feedback.

How we carried out the inspection

Throughout the pandemic CQC has continued to regulate and respond to risk. However, taking into account the circumstances arising as a result of the pandemic, and in order to reduce risk, we have conducted our inspections differently.

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system and discussing findings with the provider
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider
  • Requesting evidence from the provider
  • A short site visit
  • Reviewing patient feedback
  • Undertaking a staff questionnaire.

Our findings

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.

We found that:

  • The practice had clear processes to keep people safeguarded from abuse.
  • Appropriate standards of cleanliness were met.
  • There were adequate systems to manage risks to patient safety.
  • The practice had a comprehensive programme of quality improvement activity.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care provided.
  • Care and treatment were delivered in line with current legislation.
  • Staff worked together and with other organisations to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Leaders demonstrated they had the skills to deliver high quality care.
  • There were clear systems of accountability to support good governance.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Implement a process to review when non-clinical staff are required to undertake Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks, and when repeat checks are required.
  • Review the storage of medicines and access to the dispensary.
  • Improve processes to ensure all controlled drugs subject to safe custody arrangements are stored appropriately.
  • Review how emergency medicines and equipment are reviewed.
  • Improve the uptake of cervical cancer screening.
  • Improve processes to gather patient feedback on key changes to the service.
  • Ensure all patients are issued with a steroid card where required.

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

4 July 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Wellside Surgery on 6 December 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good, with requires improvement for providing safe services. The full comprehensive report on the 6 December 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Wellside Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We undertook a focused inspection on 4 July 2017 to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements in relation to the breach identified in our previous inspection on 6 December 2016. This report only covers our findings in relation to those requirements.

Overall the practice remains rated as good.

Our key findings from this inspection were as follows:

  • Improvements had been made to the system used to ensure that all prescriptions were signed before medicines were dispensed to patients.
  • The practice had implemented a revised schedule of annual health reviews for patients with mental health concerns.
  • Learning points from significant events were recorded effectively to allow for appropriate reflection. Significant events were subject to a regular review process to highlight the occurrence of any themes.
  • Improvements had been made to how near misses in the dispensary were recorded and reviewed.
  • The practice had made changes to how notes from safeguarding meetings were recorded to show a clear track record of decision making processes and actions taken.
  • Members of staff we spoke with were aware of the emergency medicines held in the practice.
  • The practice had developed an effective system to review and disseminate guidance and updates from the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 December 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Wellside Surgery on 6 December 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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 and addressed but not always appropriately reviewed to ensure learning was recorded.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed but improvements were required in the dispensary.
  • 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.
  • Feedback from patients about their care was positive. Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment. Data from the National GP Patient Survey published in July 2016 showed that patients rated the practice in line with others for most aspects of care.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • 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 well supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider must make an improvement:

  • Ensure safety systems in the dispensary are improved. The practice must ensure stock control in the dispensary is undertaken in line with national guidance and near misses are appropriately recorded to allow for effective audit and learning. Prescriptions issued to patients also need to be signed by a prescriber before being issued; this applies predominantly to routine prescriptions, which at times were not signed until the end of the day after being issued.

The areas where the provider should make an improvement:

  • Ensure that patients with mental health concerns receive timely annual health reviews.
  • Ensure learning from significant events is recorded effectively to allow for appropriate reflection.
  • Ensure significant events are subject to a regular review process.
  • Ensure that safeguarding meetings are minuted effectively, providing a track record of decision making processes and actions taken.
  • Ensure all staff are aware of the location of the emergency medicines.
  • Ensure there is an effective system in place to review and disseminate NICE guidance and updates.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

19 November 2013

During a routine inspection

We visited the surgery on 19 November 2013. During our visit we spoke with 13 people who were waiting for their appointments to see either a GP, or a nurse. They all told us they had been treated with courtesy and politeness at all times. They each expressed an appreciation of the information they had been given by GPs and nurses. One person said, "The doctors I have seen are usually easy to talk to and tell me the information about my illness that I want to know..... I have been able to make a choice about which hospital I went to and whether I wanted to be referred to a consultant at the hospital".

People had received care and treatment after they had been assessed and examined. We found that frequently people's treatment had been provided after it had been considered in the context of other aspects of their lives that impacted upon their wellbeing.

Children and vulnerable adults were assured of being kept safe by the policies and training that staff had received.

We found that the management of medicines dispensed and used by the surgery were safely managed.

The premises were well maintained, comfortable and appeared clean. Overall, the premises were a safe and suitable environment for people and for staff to work in.