The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Woden Road Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Surgery, Woden Road, Heath Town, Wolverhampton, West Midlands, WV10 0BD (01902) 454242

Provided and run by:
Woden Road 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 Woden Road 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 Woden Road Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

18 October 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Woden Road Surgery on 18 October 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.

28 June 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Woden Road Surgery on 15 August 2016. The overall rating for the practice was Good with Requires Improvement for providing safe services. The full comprehensive report on the August 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Woden Road Surgery on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 28 June 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breach in regulation that we identified at our previous inspection on 16 August 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is now rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and there was a system in place for reporting and recording significant events. The provider had reviewed how they shared the outcome and learning from significant events. Information was shared at monthly staff specific meetings. The sharing of information and learning could be further improved by periodically discussing all significant events that have occurred with the whole staff team.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed. Improvements had been made to the management of high risk medicines and recruitment procedures. Systems were in place for monitoring and review of prescriptions that had not been collected.

We also saw the following best practice recommendations we previously made in relation to providing safe, caring and responsive services had been actioned:

  • The provider had introduced a system for checking the cleanliness of the patient facilities through out the day.
  • Staff had attended fire safety, health and safety and basic life support training and to provide them with the skills needed to deal with unexpected emergencies.
  • The provider had reviewed practices around maintaining confidentiality in the reception area. Notices were displayed to inform patients that they could request to speak with a member of staff in private if they wished to.
  • The provider had removed the book for recording complaints and concerns from the reception area. Patients wishing to raise concerns were encouraged to put their concerns in writing or offered the opportunity to speak with the business manager.
  • Information about registering as a carer was displayed in the waiting room, in addition to information signposting carers to support services. The provider had increased the number of carers identified from 0.7% to 1.2% of the practice list.
  • The provider had reviewed access to the building for patients with mobility difficulties. The external door was left open throughout the day, with notices asking patients not to close the door. A door bell to alert staff that a patient needed assistance was in place by the external door with a prominent notice informing patients to ring for assistance. The provider was in the process of obtaining quotes for the installation of an automatic door.

However, there were still areas of practice where the provider could make improvements.

The provider should:

  • Consider periodically discussing all significant events that had occurred with the whole staff team.
  • Consider discussing medicine and safety alerts at a central forum and recording actions taken on a central log.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

15 August 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Woden Road Surgery on 15 August 2016. The practice is rated as good for providing effective, caring, responsive and well-led services but requires improvement for providing safe services. 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. However, although significant events were actioned immediately, there was a long period before the outcome and learning from these was shared with staff.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed, with the exception of those relating to recruitment checks and the management of high risk medicines.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had received training appropriate to their roles to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • The majority of patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect. However, patients had concerns about the lack of confidentiality in the reception area.
  • Information about the services offered and how to make a complaint was available and easy to understand. Patients expressed concerns about the method used to record verbal complaints, as it did not ensure patient confidentiality.
  • Patients said they did not always receive continuity of care because they were unable to get an appointment with the same or preferred GP. Urgent appointments were available the same day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. However, access for patients with mobility difficulties was available but limited to support independent access. For example, the internal door was wide enough for patients who used wheelchairs but had a conventional handle with no assisted entry.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by the 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.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are:

  • Ensure systems are put in place for the proper and safe management of medicines.
  • Complete employment checks as required by legislation for all staff employed.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Review the practice’s system for sharing the outcome of significant events with staff to ensure timely action by all staff to improve safety.
  • Review systems for checking the day-to-day cleanliness of patient facilities.
  • Consider a review of staff training related to health and safety to ensure that all staff have the skills needed to deal with unexpected emergencies.
  • Review practices in the reception area to ensure confidentiality when patients share private information and the recording of verbal complaints and concerns.
  • Consider pro-actively identifying carers and establishing what support they need.
  • Review access to the premises for patients with mobility difficulties to promote independent access or a safe means of assisted entry.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice