The Practice @ 188

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We assessed a total of 2 quality statements from this key question and found areas of good practice. The scores for this area have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for this key question remains good. We found there was a proactive culture of safety based on openness and honesty. Staff took concerns seriously and ensured all concerns were thoroughly investigated and reported.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Patients felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding. Patients felt the provider took concerns seriously and proactively made improvements to the service. Patients who used the service did not report any concerns during the assessment about the care and treatment they received.

The leadership team encouraged staff to raise concerns when things went wrong. Learning from clinical issues was shared with all relevant members of staff. Staff felt there was an open culture, and that safety was prioritised. Staff told us they were supported and received training and equipment needed to carry out their roles.

There were embedded processes for reporting incidents, near misses and safety events. There was a system to record and investigate complaints, and when things went wrong, staff apologised and gave patients support. Learning from incidents and complaints resulted in changes that improved care for others.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe and effective staffing during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Staff involved patients in reviews of their medicines and helped them understand how to manage their medicines safely. Patients knew what to do and who to contact if their condition did not improve or they experienced any unexpected symptoms.

Staff were trained on medicines management, and felt confident managing the storage, administration and recording of medicines. Staff managed medicines-related stationery appropriately and securely. Staff followed protocols to ensure they prescribed all medicines safely. Medicines reviews were documented, and audits were completed to ensure medicines were managed in a safe and effective way.

Staff managed medicines safely. There was a system in place for ensuring stock levels and expiry dates for all medicines, including emergency medicines, were monitored appropriately. Staff showed how they disposed of expired or unwanted medicines that patients had returned. Staff stored medical gases, such as oxygen, safely and there was a system in place for ensuring safety risk assessments were completed.

The provider had effective systems to manage and respond to safety alerts and medicines recalls. Staff followed established processes to ensure patients prescribed medicines with specific risks received recommended monitoring.

As part of our assessment we reviewed prescribing data and found staff took steps to ensure they prescribed medicines appropriately to optimise care outcomes for patients. For example, the number of antimicrobials issued by the provider was higher than local and national averages. This was because the practice had a higher than average number of patients aged 60 years of age and older. The practice provides care and treatment for 9 local care homes. There was a programme of regular clinical auditing of prescribing that focused on improving care and treatment.