The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Dr R Sigurdsson & Partners

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

116 Kings Road, Herne Bay, Kent, CT6 5RE 0844 387 9933

Provided and run by:
Park 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 Dr R Sigurdsson & Partners 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 Dr R Sigurdsson & Partners, you can give feedback on this service.

15 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Dr R Sigurdsson & Partners on 15 November 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.

16 November 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Dr R Sigurdsson & Partners on 16 November 2016. 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 for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the experience, and had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge, 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. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients 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 and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

We saw areas of outstanding practice:

  • There was an over age 75’s health check and frailty assessment offered in the patient’s home. These checks were carried out by health care assistants. The practice said that this helped with the early identification of patients who were becoming confused, frail or socially isolated.
  • There was a quarterly governance report which summarised complaints, complements and significant events and the learning from them

There is one area where the provider should make improvements:

  • The practice should review the systems used to identify patients who are caring for others so as to develop a carers’ register which is more reflective of the patient population.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice