The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Court View Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2a Darnley Road, Strood, Rochester, Kent, ME2 2HA (01634) 290333

Provided and run by:
Court View 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 Court View 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 Court View Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

6 December 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Court View Surgery on 6 December 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.

3 May 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection November 2014 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced inspection at Dr JTW Spinks & Partners (also known as Court View Surgery) on 3 May 2018. This inspection was carried out under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. The inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice had an effective system to manage infection prevention and control. However, we noted inconsistencies between the practice audit and policy, in relation to the timescale for changing disposable privacy curtains.
  • The systems for managing and storing medicines were safe. However, there were inconsistencies in how medicines for use in an emergency were being maintained. The practice pharmacist had identified a risk associated with international ratio (INR) results and the change in practice implemented had been recognised by the clinical commissioning group (CCG) and had been adopted by all GP practices within the CCG.
  • There was an effective induction system for temporary staff. However, we noted there was no formal induction pack available for locum GPs.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • The practice had a system for responding to concerns and complaints. Information on how to raise concerns or complaints were available.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Improve audit procedures in relation to infection prevention and control, to ensure information available to staff is consistent.
  • Improve the way in which emergency medicines are maintained.
  • Continue with their plan to implement a formal induction pack for locum GPs.
  • Continue to monitor and improve low Quality Outcome Framework results.
  • Continue to monitor and improve low national GP patient survey results in relation to telephone access.
  • Continue with their plan to re-establish an active patient participation group.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice

19 November 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced inspection at Dr JTW Spinks & Partners on 19 November 2014. During the inspection we gathered information from a variety of sources. For example, we spoke with patients, interviewed staff of all levels and checked that the right systems and processes were in place.

Overall the practice is rated as good. This is because we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring and responsive services and outstanding for delivering well-led services. It was also good for providing services for all patient population groups.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • The practice was clean and patients told us they had no concerns with the cleanliness of the practice. Medicines were managed well and the practice was well equipped and trained to deal with medical emergencies.
  • Patients were happy with the care treatment and support they had received. Patients told us they had been involved and felt included in decisions about their care, treatment and support at the practice.
  • Patients were happy with the current appointment system and said it was easy to obtain an appointment when they needed one and they were able to get through on the telephone.
  • The practice engaged patients and staff in the operation of the service and ensured that staff had received appropriate learning and development opportunities to enable them to provide effective care, treatment and support to patients.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice