The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Lavant Road Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

8 Lavant Road, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 5RH (01243) 527264

Provided and run by:
Lavant Road Surgery

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Lavant Road Surgery 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 Lavant Road Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

28 February 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Lavant Road Surgery on 28 February 2020. 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.

4 October 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating September 2016 – Good)

The key questions at this inspection are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Lavant Road Surgery on 4 October 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the practice learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The practice reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided. It ensured that care and treatment was delivered according to evidence- based guidelines.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they could access care when they needed it. However, some felt that the wait for a routine appointment with their own GP was too long.
  • The environment was clean and hygienic.
  • Staff had the skills, training and knowledge they required to undertake their roles effectively.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Develop a formal, written policy and procedure for identifying and reporting significant events so that staff are clear on what to report and how.
  • Improve performance against the quality and outcomes framework indicators for diabetes, hypertension, chronic lung disease and mental health indicators.
  • Keep a central record that provides an audit trail of action taken in response to external medicine and patient safety alerts.
  • Provide awareness training for reception staff on the ‘red flag’ sepsis symptoms that might be reported by patients and how to respond.
  • Ensure that all the practice’s complaints literature provides the name and contact details for the practice manager, NHS England, the parliamentary and health service ombudsman and independent advocacy support services.
  • Increase uptake of cervical screening amongst eligible patients.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

9 September 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Lavant Road Surgery on 9 September 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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.
  • Risks to patients were assessed and well managed.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • 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 clear leadership structure and staff felt supported by 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 should make improvements are:

  • Establish formal governance arrangements for the on site dispensary.

  • Continue to make improvements to the management of patients with diabetes, hypertension, poor mental health and dementia.

  • Review the findings from the national GP survey and look at ways of improving the responses to the number of patients who said the last nurse they saw was good at involving them in decisions about their care.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

25 February 2014

During a routine inspection

We spoke with nine adult patients, one of whom was a representative of the Patient Participation Group, and one child. We also spoke with four GPs, two nurse practitioners, a practice nurse and health care assistant as well as the practice manager, business manager and several reception and administration staff.

Patients told us that they felt well informed and involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. They said that all staff were approachable. Confidentiality was protected. Patients were happy with the care and treatment they received and valued the local services provided.

We looked at the processes that the practice had in place to ensure the patients were protected from abuse. We found that there were systems and processes in place to protect patients and that staff demonstrated knowledge of how to report any concerns.

Staff told us that they had training and development opportunities and that they were well supported by the provider. They felt well qualified for their roles and responsibilities.

We found processes in place to review and monitor the quality of the service provided. There was learning from the processes and the information was used to improve the service.