Home   News   Article

Subscribe Now

Good practice gets apology from CQC

More news, no ads


Long Sutton medical centre'Photo: SG311012-TW www.spaldingtoday.co.uk/buyaphoto ENGANL00120120511093506
Long Sutton medical centre'Photo: SG311012-TW www.spaldingtoday.co.uk/buyaphoto ENGANL00120120511093506

A health group serving Long Sutton and Sutton Bridge has had its good name restored after a blunder by health inspectors.

Suttons Medical Group has been rated “Good” in all areas by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in a report published after an “extremely thorough” inspection in December.

The CQC has also apologised to staff after a previous report published last year had wrongly put the group “in the highest risk category”, without any inspection having been carried out.

Dr Christopher Booth, the group’s senior GP partner, said: “As a practice, we are committed to providing the highest quality and a safe service to our patients.

“We are really pleased that the CQC has taken this step to rectify the inaccurate rating that had previously been published with regard to Suttons Medical Group.

“The recent CQC inspection of our practices was extremely thorough and we are very pleased that the rating which we have now been officially awarded reflects the standard of care that we continue to strive for and achieve.

“It also reflects all of the hard work and commitment of our GPs and staff in caring for our patient population.”

The CQC report, published in April after an inspection of Long Sutton Medical Centre last December, praised staff for the services to older people, patients with long-term conditions, children, young people and the mentally ill.

“We found the practice to be good for providing safe, well-led, effective, caring and responsive services,” the report said.

However, CQC inspectors did advise the group to improve the way it dispenses medicines, allow nurses “to continue to access clinical supervision” and to regularly check its “whistleblowing” and child protection policies.

A CQC spokesman said: “The first publication of our data for general practice was being reported as a judgement and rating.

“Following feedback, we completed a comprehensive review of the data and, as a result, we made a number of changes and apologise for any concern this may have caused GPs, staff and patients.”

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More