The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Pennine Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

193 Manchester Road, Mossley, Ashton Under Lyne, Lancashire, OL5 9AJ (01457) 832590

Provided and run by:
Pennine 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 Pennine 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 Pennine Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

11 November 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced inspection at Pennine Medical Centre on 11 November 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as Good.

The key questions are rated as:

Safe – Good

Effective – Good

Caring – Good

Responsive – Good

Well-led – Good

The provider was last inspected November 2015 and was rated Good overall, with responsive rated as outstanding.

At the last inspection we rated the practice as outstanding for providing responsive because:

  • The innovative work of the practice matron and the minor ailments scheme provided by the clinical pharmacists.

At this inspection, we found that those areas previously regarded as outstanding practice were now embedded throughout many GP practices. While the provider had maintained this good practise, the threshold to achieve an outstanding rating had not been reached. The practice is therefore now rated good for providing responsive services.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

We undertook this inspection as part of a selection of services rated good and outstanding.

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 by telephone and 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
  • Gaining feedback from staff using staff questionnaires
  • A shorter site visit

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 have rated this practice as good for providing, safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led services because:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

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

  • Continue to promote and encourage the uptake of cervical screening.
  • Continue to monitor patients prescribed high risk medicines and those with long term conditions are invited for and attend for required monitoring and reviews.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

To Be Confirmed

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Pennine Medical Centre on 11 May 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, appropriately reviewed and addressed.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, including those relating to recruitment checks.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • Data showed patient outcomes were in line with or above those locally and nationally.
  • Feedback from patients about their care was consistently and strongly positive.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a result of feedback from patients.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment 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 majority of staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

We saw examples of outstanding practice including:

  • The practice matron was involved in best interest meetings and supporting staff and carers in residential or nursing homes to ensure Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLs) where appropriate were in place.
  • The practice employed a clinical pharmacist who provided medication reviews for patients. In addition they ran a minor aliments scheme in which patients could access appointments with the clinical pharmacist for aliments such as hayfever, allergies, coughs and colds and emergency contraception. Results from the quarterly evaluations of the scheme showed high levels of patient satisfaction. Results also showed 2% of patients would have attended A&E and 19% would have gone to the walk in centre had they not seen the pharmacist at the practice.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

15 August 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who used the service. They told us they were happy with the service they received. Comments included: 'I wouldn't want to change my doctor", ' I can always get a same day appointment if my child is ill", I'm very happy here", " they take time to explain things to you", " I always see the same doctor so he knows my history".

Staff showed an awareness of the cultural and religious values and beliefs of people using the service and how this may affect the care and support they require.

People who used the service were referred to other healthcare services when required and the provider maintained detailed consultation notes in order to ensure people received appropriate care and treatment that met their needs.

Staff received training in safeguarding and were able to describe the possible signs that abuse was occurring.There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff employed by the practice to meet people's needs.

The practice had an established patient participation group (PPG). A PPG is made of practice staff and patients that are representative of the practice population. The main aim of the PPG is to ensure that patients are involved in decisions about the range and quality of services provided by the practice.Information about the PPG and meeting dates were available in the waiting area.The PPG met three times a year. These meeting were well attended by patients and members felt that the practice listened to their views.

Accurate records were kept for each patient and the practice had policies in place to comply with the Data Protection Act and the Freedom of information Act.