Dr Uday Kanitkar Also known as Moss Side Medical Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

The practice had systems and processes to keep clinicians up to date with current evidence-based practice. We found that patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed and these included interventions required to ensure effective care was delivered. Do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation orders were appropriately completed. A new clinical audit process had been put in place. This key question has been rated as requires improvement.

This service scored 42 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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

The assessment of 17 May to 6 June 2024 found that improvements made following a previous inspection had been sustained.

The Registered Manager told us they carried out monthly searches in order to continually monitor the care and treatment of people. At this assessment we found that the improvements made had again been sustained.

Our clinical searches produced positive results. We found no concerns in our searches for potential missed diagnoses of diseases or with the monitoring of conditions. The Registered Manager provided evidence of the processes in place to ensure regular searches were carried out to ensure monitoring was up to date.

.

We therefore had assurance that the practice had systems and processes in place to keep was up to date with evidence-based care and treatment, and it was able to sustain previous improvements made.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The assessment of 17 May to 6 June 2024 found that, with the exception of a Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) audit, there was no evidence of a regular programme of updated clinical audits. At this assessment we found improvement in this area.

The Registered Manager and business manager explained that there was a documented programme of audits, and a salaried GP was the audit lead. They told us that following the previous assessment they had revised the process and audit programme. As they had, in effect, re-started the programme there was no evidence of clinical audits, other than DNACPR, being repeated at this stage. However, they were included in the programme and going forward evidence of completed audit cycles would be available.

The practice had updated its process for recording audits, and there was now a standardised format to record them and store results. We saw evidence that an audit programme was in place and GPs knew when they would be repeated. We saw that audits were discussed in clinical meetings and all staff knew how to access audits and the dates they would be repeated.

Although the practice was in the process of repeating audits in specific areas, we saw positive outcomes from the audits that had taken place. We saw that re-audits were scheduled to monitor improvements, and the audit lead discussed all audits with the clinical team to ensure improvements were made.

We therefore had assurance that monitoring and improving outcomes was a priority improvements had been made, and processes were in place to ensure continuous improvement.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.