The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

London Prolotherapy Ltd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

88 Willesden Lane, London, NW6 7TA 07921 824714

Provided and run by:
London Prolotherapy Ltd

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about London Prolotherapy Ltd 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 London Prolotherapy Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.

7 December 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall.

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

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at London Prolotherapy Ltd on 7 December 2022 as part of our inspection programme.

The service offered ultrasound-guided prolotherapy (an injection treatment used to relieve pain) injections in the spine area. In addition, the service offered joint injections and osteopathy (a way of detecting, treating and preventing health problems by moving, stretching and massaging a person's muscles and joints).

The senior doctor is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

For reasons of safety and infection prevention and control related to the COVID-19 pandemic, we did not commission patient feedback with CQC comment cards. We spoke to four patients during this inspection and received positive feedback.

Our key findings were:

  • There were clear systems and processes to safeguard patients from abuse. The doctor had received training appropriate to their role.
  • Consultations were comprehensive and undertaken in a professional manner.
  • Clinical records were detailed and held securely.
  • Consent procedures were in place and these were in line with legal requirements.
  • There was evidence of quality improvement activity.
  • The doctor was proactive in considering ways to improve and drive research in this specialist area.
  • There was an infection prevention and control policy and procedures were in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.
  • Patients were able to access care and treatment in a timely manner.
  • The service proactively gathered feedback from the patients.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

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