Dr Rana Chowdhury

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 did not find assurances that medicines were being consistently prescribed safely. The practice manager explained they had started to put systems and processes in place following the announcement of the assessment to ensure safe staffing.

This service scored 25 (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 Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

The national GP patient survey carried out from January to March 2024 had 90 responses which were positive for example, 91% stated the healthcare professional was good at treating the patient with care and concern and 96% had confidence and trust in the healthcare professional they saw or spoke to. However, the review of patient records found some did not include sufficient information to understand the patient’s assessment and management of the patient’s condition, and this may have impacted on a patient’s health.

The practice manager explained they had started to put systems and processes in place following the announcement of the assessment.

The practice manager had started to put systems and processes in place following the announcement of the inspection, and we found some were not fully implemented or developed. These included induction, safe recruitment and training. In addition, a review of a job description for a new role was not specific enough to ensure the member of staff worked within their competency.

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.

We could did not collect the evidence to score this evidence category. However, the findings of the patient’s clinical record review found that some patients experience may have been negative.

The provider responded that improvements would be made in response to the findings of the assessment and has submitted an action plan.

The practice did not have a system in place at the time of the assessment to ensure the safe management of prescriptions. Staff ensured medicines were stored safely and securely with access restricted to authorised staff. Staff had the appropriate authorisations to administer medicines (including Patient Group Directions or Patient Specific Directions). The practice held appropriate emergency medicines, risk assessments were in place to determine the range of medicines held, and a system was in place to monitor stock levels and expiry dates. There was medical oxygen and a defibrillator and systems to ensure these were regularly checked, however children’s masks were not available. Vaccines were appropriately stored.

The practice had a medicines management policy which was last reviewed by the practice manager. However, the evidence from the clinical records reviews demonstrated that the process to ensure the safe prescribing of medicines was not always effective.

As part of the assessment a number of set patient clinical record searches were undertaken by a medicine’s specialist. These searches were visible to the practice. The review of clinical record regarding medicines management found 24 of the clinical records had clinical/medicines related issues. Of these 24 records that had issues, 21 related to medicines that were issued despite medicines-related monitoring not being evident. In addition, the quality of note taking for medicines reviews were poor and the records were not contemporaneous or accurate enough to account for all the medicines patients were being prescribed concurrently. This meant, there was no assurance that medicines were consistently being prescribed safely.