The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Moorland Medical Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Dyson House, Regent Street, Leek, Staffordshire, ST13 6LU (01538) 399008

Provided and run by:
Moorland Medical Centre

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Moorland Medical Centre on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Moorland Medical Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

8 August 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Moorland Medical Centre on 8 August 2019. We did not find evidence of significant changes to the quality of service being provided since the last inspection. As a result, we decided not to inspect the surgery at this time. We will continue to monitor this information about this service throughout the year and may inspect the surgery when we see evidence of potential changes.

10 July 2017

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We previously carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Moorland Medical Centre on 28 November 2016. The overall rating for the practice was good with requires improvement in providing safe services. The full comprehensive report on the 28 November 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Moorland Medical Centre on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

This inspection was an announced focused inspection carried out on 10 July 2017 to confirm that the practice had carried out their plan to meet the legal requirements in relation to the breaches in the regulation that we identified in our previous inspection on 28 November 2016. This report covers our findings in relation to those requirements and also additional improvements made since our last inspection.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Appropriate recruitment checks had been carried out for all staff including locum GPs.

  • Non-clinical staff who chaperoned had received appropriate training and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check.

  • Formal systems for reviewing patients prescribed a high risk medicine had been implemented.

  • Risk assessments had been completed to identify which emergency medicines should be held at the practice.

We also saw the provider had implemented the best practice recommendation we previously made in relation to providing a well-led service:

  • Policies and the business continuity plan had been dated so staff knew which version to refer to for guidance.

However, there was an area of practice where the provider needs to make improvements.

The provider should:

  • Obtain recent photographic proof of identity of all members of staff.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

28 November 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Moorland Medical Centre on 28 November 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good with requires improvement in providing a safe service.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and an effective system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • Staff assessed patients’ needs and delivered care in line with current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Practice staff reviewed the needs of its local population to secure improvements to services where these were identified. For example, the practice employed a care home nurse practitioner to support patients to avoid unplanned hospital admissions.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available and easy to understand. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Most patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a GP and 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 the management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.

The areas where the provider must make improvement are:

  • Ensure that all non-clinical staff who chaperone receive a Disclosure and Barring Service check or risk assessments are completed to demonstrate how patients will be protected from potential risk.

  • Implement systems to formally review diagnostic blood tests before patients are prescribed a medicine to prevent blood clots forming in blood vessels.

  • Ensure appropriate recruitment checks are undertaken prior to employment for all staff who work at the practice including locum GPs.

  • Introduce systems to risk assess the emergency medicines that should be held at the practice and what actions should be taken to ensure that patients who experience a medical emergency receive appropriate care and treatment.

The areas where the provider should make improvement are:

  • Date all policies and the business continuity plan so it is clear when they had last been reviewed and which version staff should refer to for guidance.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice