This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

GPs buried under trusts' workload dump

GP at Hand receives ‘good’ rating from CQC

The CQC has rated Babylon GP at Hand as ‘good’ in four out of five areas in its first inspection of the service.

The digital-first GP provider was awarded an overall rating of ‘good’ but required improvement in the effectiveness of its services.

No breaches of regulation were found according to the report, and stated the Hammersmith-based practice provided safe care because of the services’ clear systems to manage risk and when incidents did happen, the practice ‘evidenced that they had learned from them and improved their processes.’

The report added that patients pointed out the ease of booking online consultations, but some patients did not always receive referrals and test results in due time.

However, it said that ‘there was clear evidence that the practice had taken the action to improve workflow processes in relation to these.’

The CQC recommended that GP at Hand review the efficacy of its services including its two-week referral services, and implement a system to follow up with individuals with ‘worrying symptoms’.

Leaders at GP at Hand have welcomed the rating and acknowledged the points of improvement that the CQC suggested.

Babylon GP at Hand Medical Director of UK clinical services Dr Matt Noble said: ‘Every GP practice will know the rigour and scrutiny that comes with a CQC inspection, so we are very pleased to have been rated as Good, that they recognised just how quickly people can get an appointment and how satisfied our patients and staff are.’

‘Our NHS GP practice offers round the clock access to GPs at no extra cost to the NHS. We have transformed how people can see a GP and this is independent confirmation that we are doing so safely in a caring and responsive manner. One of the most exciting aspects of Babylon GP at Hand is the speed with which we can review our systems, adapt and improve.’

He continued: ‘We will of course take all of the CQC’s points on board and keep striving to improve the care we give our patients.’

The news comes as Hammersmith and Fulham CCG stated it was unable to decide whether to approve GP at Hands application to be a single network.

Another digital provider, Push Doctor, has temporarily suspended children’s accounts.

Readers' comments (6)

  • Vinci Ho

    As expected.
    Like the ‘Vanguard’ sites for seven-day GP , you will deliver if you are given abundant resources to pursue the ‘best’ outcomes. Pharmaceutical companies with their phase 3 trial results for a new expensive drug into the market ? Happy days with happy outcomes.
    But the argument of justice/injustice here is about what are the purposes(telos) CCGs are to award in these new services? Have they been over-rewarded ?
    What is the CQC rating if only peanut-picking was allowed instead of cherry-picking?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    There is a point far out there when the structure fail you , when the rules aren't weapon anymore.
    They are shackles letting the bad guys get ahead.
    Jim Gordon
    Dark Knight rises

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well I'm speechless.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Dear All,
    £60 million backing and only 47,000 patients to spend it on, all you can achieve is a "good". Can CQC factor in this when they next inspect a traditional physically present GP practice.
    Regards
    Paul C

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • ‘The operation was successful, but the maharajah died...’

    ‘The Tiger King’
    (A satire on the pride and stubbornness of those in power). Now republished as the Matt Handcock Handbook

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Hopefully a different team to the one that went 3 times to Whorlton Hall.

    Panorama undercover job much more believable at getting an accurate "rating" for that service than CQC??

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say