The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Dr Kevin Newley Also known as The Maples Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Maples Surgery, 71 Evington Road, Leicester, Leicestershire, LE2 1QH (0116) 285 7111

Provided and run by:
Dr Kevin Newley

All Inspections

12 March 2015

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an unannounced focused inspection on 12 March 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective and responsive services.

Our key findings across all the areas we inspected were as follows:

  • There were adequate GP and nurse appointments available to meet patients' needs.
  • There was a robust system in place to ensure that pathology results and referrals were dealt with in an appropriate and timely manner.
  • Staff were well trained and qualified and practiced within their range of competence, skill and qualification.
  • The Advanced Nurse Practitioner had access to supervision and advice from GPs.
  • Locum GPs were aware of their responsibilities in providing supervision and advice to nursing staff.
  • There were robust systems in place to ensure patients who were assessed as requiring a home visit received one.

However there were areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

Importantly the provider should;

  • Ensure that patient notes are always completed as soon as practicable following a consultation.
  • Ensure that all staff and GPs complete comprehensive patient notes.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

8 January 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

The Maples Surgery offers a range of primary medical services from a single surgery at 71 Evington Road, Leicester LE2 1QH

Prior to our inspection we consulted with the clinical commissioning group (CCG) and the NHS England Area Team about the practice. A CCG is an organisation that brings together local GPs and experienced health professionals to take on commissioning responsibilities for local health services.

We looked at patient care across the following population groups: Older people; those with long term medical conditions; mothers, babies, children and young people; working age people and those recently retired; people in vulnerable circumstances who may have poor access to primary care; and people experiencing poor mental health.

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 8 January 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing well-led, effective, caring and responsive services. It was also good for providing services for all of the population groups.

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.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered having regard to best practice guidance.
  • Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and any further training needs had been identified and planned.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with the GP and that there was continuity of care, with urgent appointments available the same day.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs.
  • There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • Patients experienced exemplary customer services from reception staff.

However, there were also areas of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

The provider should:

  • Ensure that recommendations contained within the practice legionella assessment are carried out.
  • Ensure that clinical audit cycles are completed.
  • Adopt a system to ensure the integrity of pathological samples and to protect staff from the risk of infection associated with handling samples.
  • Ensure that fridge temperatures are checked and recorded in line with best practice guidance.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

17 June 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This inspection was carried out to see if improvements had been made following our inspection of 10 February 2014.

During this inspection, we spoke with the provider, practice manager and two members of staff. We did not speak with patients using the service.

We found that before patients received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. The provider was aware of, and acted in accordance with, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and appropriately sought advice from other professionals as necessary.

Systems were in place for patients who did not speak English. Medications were within their expiry date. Members of staff had received training in basic life support.

There were systems in place to ensure the surgery was kept clean and the standard of the cleanliness was regularly monitored. We noted the premises were currently undergoing a renovation programme which was due to be completed in August 2014.

We found the provider had an up to date recruitment policy, which had been reviewed in January 2014.

The Maples Surgery had suitable arrangements in place for staff to receive appropriate training and development. These arrangements included training, appraisals and staff meetings.

The provider had some systems in place to monitor the ongoing quality of the service provided, including audits. We found the provider had considered any risks within the surgery and was addressing these.

10 February 2014

During a routine inspection

We spoke with seven patients who used the service, including a member of the Patient Participation Group and six members of staff. We also reviewed three staff files.

The staff explained that written consent was not obtained prior to procedures being performed and could not show us any documented evidence that the procedure had been explained in full and that informed consent had been obtained.

All patients spoke highly regarding their care and the kindness displayed by the staff. One patient told us: 'The doctor is fabulous. All the staff are nice and work hard'.

We spoke with the lead for infection prevention and control and asked them to show us their schedule for reviewing and monitoring the quality of cleaning and infection prevention. We were told that no such quality checks were undertaken.

The provider did not feel it was necessary to complete a full recruitment and selection process when staff were temporarily employed. The provider did not ensure staff who were employed to work at the surgery, were suitable and of a good character

We found that staff did not always receive formal opportunities to discuss their performance and needs, such as supervision sessions. We were told no formal supervision took place although we found annual appraisals were completed.

We saw no evidence of audits or reviews for areas such as, record keeping, documentation, infection prevention and control practices, buildings' maintenance or clinical practices.