The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Heady Hill Surgery

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

114 Bury New Road, Heywood, Lancashire, OL10 4RG (01706) 603430

Provided and run by:
Heady Hill 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 Heady Hill 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 Heady Hill Surgery, you can give feedback on this service.

5 November 2019

During an annual regulatory review

We reviewed the information available to us about Heady Hill Surgery on 5 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.

6 March 2018

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection February 2015 – Good)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? - Good

As part of our inspection process, we also look at the quality of care for specific population groups. The population groups are rated as:

Older People – Good

People with long-term conditions – Good

Families, children and young people – Good

Working age people (including those recently retired and students – Good

People whose circumstances may make them vulnerable – Good

People experiencing poor mental health (including people with dementia) - Good

We carried out an announced inspection at Heady Hill Surgery on 6 March 2018 as part of our inspection programme.

At this inspection we found:

  • The practice had clear 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 routinely 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 were able to access care when they needed it.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • The practice, with other practices in the Clinical Commissioning Group and the wider NHS, had receptionists who were trained as care navigators who signposted patients to the right person at the right time across a variety of health services.
  • The practice was a training practice for doctors in their last year of postgraduate training.
  • The percentage of patients who responded to the National GP Patient Survey saying that they had confidence and trust in the last GP and the last nurse that they saw was 100% for both.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP 

Chief Inspector of General Practice

12 February 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Heady Hill Surgery on 12 February 2015. Overall the practice is rated as good.

Specifically, we found the practice to be good for providing safe, effective, caring and well-led services. The practice also provided an outstanding responsive service.

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.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered following 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.
  • The practice were continually reviewing access for patients based on feedback about their appointment system. Most patients said they found it easy to make an appointment with a named GP and that there was continuity of care.
  • 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 practice were able to evidence that they were continually monitoring and reviewing the quality of the service provided through clinical audits and information based on feedback from patients.
  • The lead GP of the practice had set up a pilot service called the Heywood Health Hub (HHH) following a successful bid for funding. HHH is a central hub of medical and nursing staff (employed by Bardoc) and provides extended hours of access, seven days a week, for all patients registered with a Heywood GP. We saw evidence that this service created increased access for patients of this and other practices.

We saw some areas of outstanding practice:

  • The practice was pro-active in their safeguarding of children. All children under the age of five years were offered a full health check to identify any underlying potential illness or safeguarding issue. The practice nurse provided an example where early intervention had provided a positive impact for the patient.
  • The practice had signed up to the electronic prescribing service and were rated the highest achieving practice in the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) with 90% of patients now receiving their prescriptions electronically. Patients were spoke with and evidence from feedback that the practice had obtained provided positive outcomes for patients in relation to this service.

Professor Steve Field (CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP) 

Chief Inspector of General Practice