The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • GP practice

Archived: Claremont Medical Practice

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Claremont Grove, Exmouth, Devon, EX8 2JF (01395) 273666

Provided and run by:
Claremont Medical Practice

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Claremont Medical Practice 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 Claremont Medical Practice, you can give feedback on this service.

4 August 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced focused inspection at Claremont Medical Practice on 4 August 2022. Overall, the practice is rated as good.

Safe - good

Effective - good

Caring - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection.

Responsive - not inspected, rating of good carried forward from previous inspection.

Well-led -good

Following our previous inspection on 19 June 2018, the practice was rated good overall and for all key questions.

The full reports for previous inspections can be found by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Claremont Medical Practice on our website at www.cqc.org.uk

Why we carried out this inspection

This inspection was a focused inspection, the practice was selected at random, from a selection of services rated Good and Outstanding to test the reliability of our new monitoring approach which involved a site visit.

We inspected the key questions of safe, effective and well-led.

How we carried out the inspection

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Conducting staff interviews using video conferencing facilities.
  • Completing clinical searches on the practice’s patient records system (this was with consent from the provider and in line with all data protection and information governance requirements).
  • Reviewing patient records to identify issues and clarify actions taken by the provider.
  • Requesting evidence from the provider.
  • A short site visit.

Our findings

We based our judgement of the quality of care at this service on a combination of:

  • what we found when we inspected
  • information from our ongoing monitoring of data about services and
  • information from the provider, patients, the public and other organisations.

We found that:

  • The practice provided care in a way that kept patients safe and protected them from avoidable harm.
  • Patients received effective care and treatment that met their needs.
  • Staff dealt with patients with kindness and respect and involved them in decisions about their care.
  • Patients could access care and treatment in a timely way.
  • The way the practice was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centre care.

Whilst we found no breaches of regulations, the provider should:

  • Continue to improve processes for medicines reviews; monitoring of long-term conditions; management of high-risk medicines; and promotion of cervical screening.

Details of our findings and the evidence supporting our ratings are set out in the evidence tables.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

19 June 2018

During a routine inspection

This practice is rated as Good overall. (Previous rating August 2015 – 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 Claremont Medical Practice on 19 June 2016 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 used the computer based CPIS (Child Protection Information System) which assisted in detecting a pattern of healthcare seeking behaviour where patients were avoiding seeing their GP. This enabled GPs and other health professionals to make informed decisions regarding child safeguarding.
  • The practice routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care they provided. They 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.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice

Please refer to the detailed report and the evidence tables for further information.

11 August 2015

During a routine inspection

Letter from the Chief Inspector of General Practice

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Claremont Medical Practice on 11 August 2015.

Overall the practice is rated as good.

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

  • Staff fulfilled their responsibilities to raise concerns and report incidents. All opportunities for learning from incidents were maximised.
  • The practice used innovative and proactive methods to improve patient outcomes, working with other local providers to share best practice.
  • Patients said they were treated with compassion, dignity and respect and were involved in decisions about their treatment. Information was provided to help patients understand the care available to them.
  • The practice worked closely with other organisations in planning how services were provided to ensure that they meet people’s needs.
  • The practice implemented suggestions for improvements and made changes to the way it delivered services as a consequence of feedback from patients and from the Patient Participation Group (PPG).
  • The practice was well equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand.
  • The practice had a clear vision which had quality and safety as its top priority. A business plan was in place, was monitored and regularly reviewed and discussed with all staff. High standards were promoted and owned by all practice staff with evidence of team working across all roles.

We identified areas of outstanding practice. For example;

The practice was innovative in delivering services to meet patient’s needs. For example, the practice had instigated a pilot scheme between October 2014 to March 2015 to introduce online face to face video conferencing appointments. Patients stated that this pilot had been successful. A total of 56 patients had been treated using the pilot scheme. All patients who used the online service had provided positive feedback. The practice had worked with local media including newspapers and radio services to advertise the service. Due to the success of the pilot the practice has continued to offer this service to all patients.

There had been some patient feedback about a lack of continuity with seeing different GPs. The practice had responded to this by introducing a GP buddy system to ensure that two GPs had good knowledge of each patient’s needs and could cover for their GP buddy’s absences. As a direct result of this feedback, the practice had also recruited successfully for a GP partner to work eight sessions (four days) a week at the practice. This enabled more patients to see the same GP if they wished to do so.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice