The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

The Arthur Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Main Street, Horsley Woodhouse, Ilkeston, Derbyshire, DE7 6AX (01332) 880249

Provided and run by:
The Arthur Medical Centre

All Inspections

17 November 2023

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out an announced assessment of The Arthur Medical Centre on 17 November 2023.

This was a targeted review of responsive services. The practice was previously inspected in January 2019 and had previously been rated good overall and good in safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Any previous ratings for the overall rating, safe, effective, caring and well-led will be unchanged following this assessment.

Rating at this assessment:

Responsive – Requires improvement.

How we carried out the assessment

This assessment was carried out virtually, through an online meeting and review of documents. This was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements.

This included:

  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A virtual meeting with the provider.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we carried out the assessment
  • 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 requires improvement for responsive services.

We found that:

  • During the assessment process, the provider highlighted the efforts they were making to improve the responsiveness of the service for their patient population. These included a new appointments system to meet increased demand for on the day care and treatment. The effect of these efforts had not yet been evaluated, therefore not yet reflected in patient feedback.
  • Data from the national survey showed the practice performed below local and national average for most of the indicators related to access, and on a downward trend.
  • The practice actively engaged with patients and responded to their feedback by revamping their appointment system to meet demand for on the day treatment.
  • The practice responded to the growing list size by expanding their premises to increase clinical and non-clinical rooms. This would enable them to see more patients at the surgery and accommodate more staff.
  • The were systems in place for monitoring appointments offered and telephone data. Staff rotas were proactively planned to meet demand during busy times and in anticipation of winter pressures.
  • Patients could access services online through the practice website and the NHS App.
  • Complaints received were reviewed effectively and learning from complaints was shared and implemented by the whole practice team.

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

  • Continue to review and evaluate measures put in place to improve access to appointments and demonstrate how they are responding to feedback from patients on access.

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

03 Jan 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Arthur Medical Centre on 3 January 2019 as part of our inspection programme.

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 and good for all population groups.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Feedback from patients was consistently positive and was higher than local and national averages.
  • There was a strong person-centred culture.
  • Services were tailored to meet the needs of individual patients. They were delivered in a flexible way that ensured choice and continuity of care.
  • Patients reported that access to the practice was good and the practice made appointments available which were suitable for the patient’s needs. The practice constantly monitored access to the surgery.
  • The culture of the practice and the way it was led and managed drove the delivery and improvement of high-quality, person-centred care.
  • The practice had developed templates to ensure all clinicians were using up-to-date, agreed templates. We were told that this improved the safety of work carried out by new members of staff and clinical trainees. All templates had national and local guidance embedded within them via hyperlinks. The templates also promoted patient safety through prompts for clinicians during and after consultations to ensure referrals and investigations were completed.
  • The practice website contained information on self-care and health information on a wide variety of conditions.
  • The practice had a range of audits which demonstrated ongoing quality improvement within the practice.

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

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

1 December 2014

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We inspected this service on 1 December 2014 as part of our new comprehensive inspection programme. The practice is located at Main Street, Horsley Woodhouse, Ilkeston, Derbyshire DE7 6AX.

The overall rating for this practice is good. We found the practice to be good in all five domains: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led. We found the practice provided good care to older people and families, children and young people, people with long-term conditions, working age people, people whose circumstances may make them vulnerable and people experiencing poor mental health.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Patients were kept safe because there were arrangements in place for staff to report and learn from key safety risks. The practice had very proactive systems in place in respect of medicines maximisation; employing two pharmacists, one of whom was a clinical pharmacist and an independent prescriber, able to see patients independently and in clinics. Two nurses were also independent prescribers with another undergoing training.
  • There were systems in place to keep patients safe from the risk and spread of infection. Systems were in place to monitor and make required improvements to infection control at the practice.
  • Patients were very satisfied with how they were treated and this was with compassion, dignity and respect. GPs and nurses were good at listening to patients and gave them enough time.
  • Most patients reported they got an appointment when needed.
  • GPs, nurses and clinical pharmacists were trained to meet a wide range of needs and the practice was very proactive at trying to prevent unplanned admissions to hospital. 2.69% of patients at risk of unplanned admissions had RightCare care plans; this was one of the highest rates in the CCG.
  • The practice had good means of communication with patients through a newsletter, website, and practice leaflets. It also had an active patient participation group that had contributed to positive improvements at the practice.
  • The practice was well led and inclusive involving internal and external staff in the development of the service. There were whole team events and weekly meetings between the GPs, the registrars and the district nurses to discuss more challenging situations and promote effective multi-disciplinary working.

The provider should:

  • Ensure all policies are reviewed and up to date

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice