The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: The Slieve Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

The Surgery, 2 The Slieve, Handsworth Wood, Birmingham, West Midlands, B20 2NR (0121) 554 1812

Provided and run by:
The Slieve Surgery

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

22 January 2020

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about The Slieve Surgery on 22 January 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.

26 October 2016

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at The Slieve Surgery on 26 October 2016. Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

  • Staff understood and fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents and near misses. 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.

  • Clinical audits had been triggered by new guidance and from learning from significant events.
  • The practice had developed and adapted several templates to improve process, services and patient care.
  • The practice were proactive in encouraging patients to attend for cervical screening resulting in higher than average attendances.

  • The practice provided health care for patients in a local care home and had provided training to staff for management of nutrition, prescriptions and phlebotomy.

  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and they were involved in their care and decisions about their treatment.
  • The practice had good facilities and was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. 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 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.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the duty of candour.
  • There was a strong team culture and the practice was cohesive and organised.

We saw some areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice were proactive in educating patients regarding the use of antibiotics, the antibiotic prescribing was 50% below target. They had developed information leaflets and poster displays in the waiting area to educate patients on the use of antibiotics. The ‘cough and cold’ clinic also had an impact. The practice developed templates and ‘pop ups’ on the clinical system reminding prescribers of current guidance.

  • The practice’s uptake for the cervical screening programme was higher than the local and national average with 0% exception rates. The practice were proactive in encouraging patients to attend for cervical screening. For example, when patients attend to see the nurse, they would, where appropriate take the smear at that time, or book the appointment for the patient, the practice manager sent letters to all patients due their smear in a particular month and the following month if they did not attend, the nurse was then alerted to the non-attenders.

However there were areas of practice where the provider should make improvements:

  • The practice should consider how they ensure staff are kept up to date with practice information including those unable to attend practice meetings

  • The practice should consider how they assure themselves that appropriate processes are in place in the absence of fire drills to ensure emergency procedures are safe.

  • The practice should review the process in place for the security of prescription stationary

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

6 August 2014

During a routine inspection

The Slieve Surgery is located in the Handsworth Wood area of Birmingham and provides primary medical services to patients who live within a one mile radius of the practice. 

The practice was safe.  There were safeguarding procedures in place and all staff had been trained in safeguarding adults and children.  Regular information sharing meetings took place with other teams such as health visitors to work to keep patients safe.  There was an open and transparent culture within the practice.

The practice was caring.  Patients were treated with dignity, respect and compassion.  Patients spoke very positively of their experiences and of the care and compassion that they received from the staff. The GPs were proactive in supporting patients who needed end of life care and there were systems in place to highlight high risk patients who were likely to need support at weekends when the practice was closed.

The practice was effective.  There were policies and a procedure in place to make sure that good practice was maintained and that all patients could be assured they received consistent and up to date care and treatment.  The practice operated a multidisciplinary approach with effective and timely referral mechanisms in place.  Induction programmes were in place and records showed that staff were trained appropriately.

The practice was responsive to patients’ needs and met the needs of specific patient groups within its practice population.  The practice had an accessible appointments system and premises.   

The practice was well led.  The practice had a strong and visible leadership which was well supported by the staff team.  The practice had an open culture that was effective and encouraged staff to share their views through staff meetings and significant events meetings.  

The practice had systems in place to learn from incidents and near misses.  The practice actively sought and acted on feedback about the standard of services they provided.  There was an active Patient Participation Group (PPG) in place, which met four times per year.  PPGs are a way in which patients and GP practices can work together to improve the quality of the service provided.  Systems and procedures were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.  There was a vision and strategic plan in place which laid out future developments for the practice. 

We examined 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 found that care was tailored appropriately to the individual circumstances and needs of patients in these groups.

Please note that when referring to information throughout this report, for example any reference to the Quality and Outcomes Framework data, this relates to the most recent information available to the CQC at that time.