The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Fernley Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

560 Stratford Road, Sparkhill, Birmingham, West Midlands, B11 4AN (0121) 411 0347

Provided and run by:
Fernley Medical Centre

All Inspections

9 November 2023

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Fernley Medical Centre on 9 November 2023. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

The ratings for each key question are as follows:

Safe - good

Effective - good

Caring - good

Responsive - requires improvement

Well-led – good

Following our previous inspection in April 2016, the practice was rated good overall and for all key questions.

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

Why we carried out this inspection

We carried out this inspection in line with our inspection priorities. The focus of the inspection included a review of all key questions.

How we carried out the inspection

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing and in person.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A site visit.
  • Conversations with members of the practice’s patient participation group.

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 found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm. This included areas such as safeguarding, recruitment, infection prevention and control and the management of the premises and associated risks.
  • There were effective systems in place to learn from incidents and complaints.
  • Our review of clinical records found safe management of medicines, including those that required ongoing monitoring due to adverse side effects.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs. Our review of clinical records demonstrated that patients at risk of long-term conditions were well managed.
  • Staff received appropriate training, supervision and support for their roles and responsibilities.
  • Some of the childhood immunisations uptake indicators and cancer screening programmes were below national targets and national averages.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care. Patient feedback from various sources was mostly positive about the service.
  • Patients were mostly able to access care and treatment in a timely way. The practice hosted the extended access service. However, results from the latest GP national patient survey were below local and national averages for questions about access.
  • 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:

  • Take further action to improve the uptake of childhood immunisations and cancer screening programmes.
  • Continue to monitor access to ensure improvements are being delivered in relation to patient satisfaction and take further action as needed.

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 Health Care

13 April 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Fernley Medical Centre on 13 April 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings 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. The practice carried out an annual significant event audit to ensure learning from significant events.

  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following best practice guidance. The GPs were leads in different areas and had weekly meetings to discuss concerns and share learning.

  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by the GPs and the practice manager. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients which it acted on. There was a very pro-active Patient Participation Group (PPG) of which we met with eight members during the inspection.

  • The practice was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.

  • Patients described staff as caring, understanding and helpful. Patients commented that they were treated them with dignity and respect

  • 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 was able to refer patients to a community clinic to get expert specialist advice in a number of specialities without needing to refer to secondary care. This meant that there were shorter waiting times for appointments and it was more convenient for patients as the facilities were local.

  • In the last year the practice had obtained second opinions in this clinic for:

    • 183 dermatology (skin) referrals

    • 29 opthalmology (eye) referrals

    • 472 ultrasound scan referrals

  • Appointments were available to practice patients as well as patients from six other practices in the locality. Unregistered patients signed a consent form which allowed the practice to access their medical records. This included enhanced sexual health services for patients of other practices. This meant that patients would not have to wait for eight week referrals to secondary care.

  • Staff had also attended education sessions in female genital mutilation (FGM) and Domestic Violence Training (IRIS).

  • The CCG funded a winter pressures scheme to help with patient expectations and demands. This commenced on 15 December 2015 for an initial duration of three months. Through this initiative they were providing same day appointments between 2pm-6pm every weekday and 10am to 4pm on weekends. This scheme had been extended by the CCG and allowed the practice to take pressure away from A&E departments.

  • The practice was one of the few GP practices providing enhanced sexual health services to registered and unregistered patients.

The provider should:

  • Implement a programme of continuous audit to complete audit cycles and gauge the effectiveness of the improvements it makes.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice