Stafford Skincare Limited - Lichfield

This service is rated as Good overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Outstanding

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Stafford Skincare Limited-Lichfield as part of our inspection programme.

Skincare Limited -Litchfield is a private dermatology clinic for adults and children over the age of four years, run by Dr Kathleen Anne Ward, a Consultant dermatologist in the West Midlands. All appointments are with Dr Ward.

This service is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Stafford Skincare Limited provides a range of non-surgical cosmetic interventions, for example, dermal fillers, injectables, skin rejuvenation treatments and skincare products which are not within the scope of CQC registration. Therefore, we did not inspect or report on these services.

Dr Ward is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with CQC 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.

Due to the current pandemic we were unable to obtain comments from patients via our normal process of asking the provider to place comment cards within the service location. However, we saw the clinics 2021 patient survey, there were 54 patients reviews. We found that patients were consistently extremely positive about the service, describing the service as professional, and that the clinic was very clean and well maintained. We did not speak with patients on the day, as there were none attending for regulated activities.

Our key findings were:

• The service had safety systems and processes in place to keep people safe. There were systems to identify, monitor and manage risks and to learn from incidents.
• There were regular reviews of the effectiveness of treatments, services and procedures to ensure care and treatment was delivered in line with evidence-based guidelines.
• The service had a programme of quality improvement through clinical and internal audits. These were used to monitor quality, make improvements and to provide quality auditable data. Annual reviews also took place.
• Staff treated patients with compassion, respect and kindness and involved them in decisions about their care.
• The treatment was carried out on time and advice was given and arrangements were in place for any potential follow up treatment.
• The leadership and governance arrangements promoted good quality care.

The Care Quality Commission received over 96 extremely positive unsolicited ‘share your experience of care’ reviews. We found and patients reported:

• There was a strong visible, person-centred culture, with the clinician highly motivated and inspired to offer care that was kind and promoted people’s dignity. Patients reported on the welcome and prompt service, which they described as professional, friendly and informative.
• Staff recognised and respected the totality of people’s needs. They took into account people’s personal, cultural, social and religious needs.
• People who used services were active partners in their care.
• The clinician was committed to working in partnership with people and making this a reality for each person. Patients who experienced care and treatment at the service reported on the individual approach and kindness and that care was tailored to their needs.
• Patients reported they had been in receipt of a detailed diagnosis with detailed treatment options that were fully explained. Explanation of patients conditions and the potential risks or issues were provided on a one to one basis in plain English with clear explanations of the condition and actions to be taken.
• Patients reported that they felt respected, listened too and found the clinician was thorough.
• Significant praise was made by patients for the clinician and the adaptations made to ensure safe practice during the pandemic. by implementing changes that reduced the impact on the timely delivery of care and treatment.
• The clinical environment and COVID-19 precautions in place, for example that the consultation/treatment room was meticulously clean.
• The services own patient survey produced consistently positive results year on year.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP
Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care