The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Ponteland Medical Group

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Meadowfield Industrial Estate, Ponteland, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE20 9SD (01661) 825513

Provided and run by:
Northumbria Primary Care Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

23 Jul 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Ponteland Medical Group on 23 July 2019. This was to check the practice had made the improvements we said they should, when we last inspected the practice in July 2018.

At the last inspection, we rated the practice as requires improvement for providing responsive services. We said the provider should:

  • Continue to monitor, review and address patients’ concerns about the difficulties they experience accessing the practice by telephone and obtaining a suitable appointment.
  • Continue to involve and consult the practice’s patient participation group about proposed changes and planned improvements.
  • Review the content of the practice’s website to make sure it includes relevant and useful information for patients and is kept up-to-date.

At this inspection, we found that the provider had acted to address these areas.

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 rated this practice as good overall. (Previous rating July 2018 – Good).

We rated the practice as good for providing responsive services because the practice had:

  • Carried out audits to look for improvements to the telephone and audit system.
  • Altered clinician and reception rotas to better meet patient demand for appointments and to have more staff free to answer telephone calls at busy times.
  • Installed a system to be able to review the phone lines in real time so that extra staff could answer calls when needed.
  • Standardised patient flows so that follow-up appointments could now be booked by a GP, removing the need for the patient to book another appointment themselves.
  • Promoted online access for booking appointments and test results. The number of patients who had signed up for this had increased by 400 patients (from 24% to 28% of the patient list) in the last three months.
  • Liaised with the patient participation group to get feedback on the measures taken to improve systems.
  • Put information on display in the waiting area and on the website to communicate to patients what changes were being made.
  • Carried out surveys which showed that patient satisfaction with access to appointments and via telephone was gradually improving.

We recommend that the practice should:

  • Continue in their efforts to improve patient access and to continue gathering patient feedback on the changes made to the telephone and appointment system to ensure these are continuing to lead to improvements for patients.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

3 July 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as good overall. (Previous inspection – 7 February 2017 – rating – requires improvement).

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Requires improvement

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ponteland Medical Group on 3 July 2018, to check that the provider had addressed the areas of concern we identified at our previous inspection in February 2017.

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.
  • Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care and treatment they provided. Staff ensured that care and treatment was delivered in line with evidence-based guidelines.
  • The practice organised and delivered services to meet patients’ needs. They took account of patient needs and preferences.
  • Following our last inspection, leaders had taken action to improve telephone access and access to appointments. Although there was evidence this had increased levels of patient satisfaction, patients told us further improvements were still needed. Leaders recognised they needed to sustain this improvement to continue increasing patient satisfaction levels.
  • There was a very strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • Staff involved patients in decisions about their care and treatment and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • The practice had a clear vision to deliver high quality care and promote good outcomes for patients.
  • Governance processes and systems for business planning, risk management, performance and quality improvement operated effectively.

We also saw an area of outstanding practice:

  • The provider operated a closed Facebook group to deliver educational sessions, to help promote staff learning and skills development. These were live stream sessions to which all of the provider’s clinical staff were invited. These sessions covered a range of topics such as: managing diabetes for patients with end-of-life needs; improving referrals management; the use of a haematology ‘app’ (this session was led by a consultant doctor); the development of a scoring tool to promote better antibiotic prescribing.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Where the practice’s exception reporting rates are higher than the local clinical commissioning group and England averages, take action to reduce them.
  • Continue to monitor, review and address patients’ concerns about the difficulties they experience accessing the practice by telephone and obtaining a suitable appointment.
  • Continue to involve and consult the practice’s patient participation group about proposed changes and planned improvements.
  • Review the content of the practice’s website to make sure it includes relevant and useful information for patients and is kept up-to-date.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP
Chief Inspector of General Practice

7 February 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Ponteland Medical Group on 7 February 2017. Overall, the practice is rated as requires improvement.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. Lessons were learned when incidents and near misses occurred.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • The arrangements for managing medicines, including emergency drugs and vaccinations, in the practice did not always keep patients safe.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Patients found the appointment system difficult to use. Most patients said they found it difficult to make a routine appointment with a GP and there was insufficient continuity of care. Urgent appointments were available on the same day.
  • Results for the National GP Survey, published in July 2016, were below local and national averages access to services. For example, for those that responded, 43% found it easy to get thorough to the surgery by phone (CCG average 77%, national average 73%).
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. However, the processes in place to manage health and safety and fire safety required review.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management.
  • The practice had comprehensive policies and procedures governing their activities and there were good systems in place to monitor and improve quality.
  • The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available on the practice website and easy to understand.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour regulation.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • The practice must ensure the safe management of medicines. Specifically, ensure that the practice complies with national guidance on the use of Patient Specific Directives, cold chain management and the recording of expiry checks for medicines.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review the arrangements for tracking prescription pads between surgeries.
  • Continue to monitor and review access to appointments and the telephone system currently in operation.
  • Take steps to ensure confidentiality is maintained in the reception area.
  • Review the arrangements for the clinical audit of minor surgery.
  • Take steps to improve communication with the patient participation group.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice