The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Drs King, Hill and Entwistle Also known as Haslington Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Crewe Road, Haslington, Crewe, Cheshire, CW1 5QY (01270) 275900

Provided and run by:
Drs King, Hill and Entwistle

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Drs King, Hill and Entwistle 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 Drs King, Hill and Entwistle, you can give feedback on this service.

2 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Drs King, Hill and Entwistle on 2 November 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.

25 April 2017

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Drs King, Hill and Entwistle on 7 June 2016. Overall the practice was rated as requires improvement. We rated the practice as requires improvement in the four domains of safety, effective, responsive and well led. We rated the practice good for the caring domain. The practice was issued with Requirement Notices and a Warning Notice. The full comprehensive report on the 7 June 2016 inspection can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Drs King, Hill and Entwistle on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We undertook an announced comprehensive inspection on 25 April 2017 to check that the practice had responded to the concerns which were identified during the inspection of 7 June 2016. The practice is now rated as good overall.

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

  • There was an open and transparent approach to safety and a system in place for reporting and recording significant events.
  • The practice had defined and embedded systems to minimise risks to patient safety.
  • Staff were aware of current evidence based guidance. Staff had been trained to provide them with the skills and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • Results from the national GP patient survey showed patients were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available. Improvements were made to the quality of care as a result of complaints and concerns.
  • Patients we spoke with said they found it easy to make an appointment with their registered 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 leadership structure and staff said they felt supported by management. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.
  • The provider was aware of the requirements of the duty of candour. Examples we reviewed showed the practice complied with these requirements.

There were areas where the provider should make improvement. The provider should:

  • Develop a formal programme or plan of continuous clinical and internal audit.

  • Good practice and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) were used by staff but the provider should implement a system to ensure these guidelines were followed up and appropriate actions taken to stop this happening again.

  • Review the staff training matrix to ensure accurate records are kept for the full training undertaken by staff.

  • Ensure measures are in place to maintain the security of prescription forms used in printers when the printer is left unattended, such as overnight or when the consulting room is not in use.

  • Undertake a risk assessment for the handling and use of liquid nitrogen.

  • Ensure full records are completed for the system in place for cascading safety alerts.

  • Complete full records for each significant event analysis including the analysis formto show the investigation that has been undertaken and what actions have been taken.

  • Undertake an audit of all staff files to ensure f

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

7 June 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Drs King, Hill and Entwistle on 7 June 2016. Overall the practice is rated as requires improvement.

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. Some patients expressed concern about the curt manner of the GPs.
  • Information about services and how to complain was not readily available. Patients we spoke with did not know how to complain. There was no effective system for recording and managing complaints. Verbal complaints were not recorded.
  • Patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named 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 leadership structure, although some staff did not feel supported by the partners and there was a lack of overarching governance. Concerns about workloads expressed by nursing staff had not been addressed.
  • Non-clinical staff said they felt detached from the GP partners and there was no practice vision for staff to aspire to.
  • The practice did not proactively seek feedback from staff and the patient participation group thought they could be more actively involved in the practice.
  • There was a lack of understanding of the Mental Capacity Act amongst some staff and some clinical staff had not received training in this area. Training was not well planned and some staff required refresher training in some subject areas.

The areas where the provider must make improvements are.

  • Implement an effective system and process for obtaining, recording and retaining recruitment information.

  • Introduce a system for effective recording, management and review of complaints.

  • Listen and support staff regarding concerns about welfare and workloads.

  • Establish and embed a practice vision and ethos of continuous improvement.

  • Provide up to date mandatory training to all staff, for example fire safety and equality and diversity and Mental Capacity Act 2005. Introduce a system for ensuring that all training is appropriate and current.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are.

  • Review the approach to the recording and management of safety alerts.

  • Review and improve systems for checking emergency medications.

  • Review and improve security in the building so that patients cannot access non-public areas.

  • Improve systems for checking medical equipment is tested within manufacturer guidelines and ensure redundant/broken equipment is removed from treatment rooms.

  • Improve prescription form security.

  • Improve audit regime to improve outcomes for patients.

  • Ensure fire safety systems and procedures are up to date.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice