• Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Adonia Medical Clinic

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

474 Harrow Road, London, W9 3RU

Provided and run by:
DR-IME Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

16 August 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall (Previous inspection April 2018, compliant)

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 Adonia Medical Clinic as part of our routine inspection programme.

The provider is a private, independent health service that specialises in aesthetic treatment with a particular focus on dermatology.

This service is registered with 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. Adonia Medical Clinic provides a range of non-surgical cosmetic interventions, for example facial treatments, laser hair removal and dermal fillers which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we did not inspect or report on these services.

The lead clinician 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.

During the inspection, alongside the formal inspection process, we spoke to three patients to obtain feedback about the service. Patients told us that treatment plans were always explained clearly and that they felt fully informed; costing was transparent, and patients told us they were treated with care and kindness.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice promoted innovative practice within the field of aesthetic medicine by presenting outcomes and learning to peers, and lecturing to both medical students and members of the public.
  • The practice had a strong focus on safety and equality for both staff and patients, this was underpinned by comprehensive policies and a culture of continuous learning and improvement.
  • There was a comprehensive program of risk assessment, auditing and quality improvement processes, including external review of care provision and systems to closely monitor, review and manage significant events, incidents, complaints and feedback.
  • There was a comprehensive training and induction programme for staff. Staff were up to date with mandatory training and were supported with protected time to complete extra training. Staff were actively involved in practice governance and guideline review.
  • The premises was well equipped and maintained a high standard of cleanliness and infection prevention and control measures.
  • The practice was continuously searching for new ways to provide a high-level of care and service to its patients, for example attending training days and conferences to expand knowledge of new treatment and equipment available giving patients access to the latest technologies and most up-to-date services not available.
  • The registered manager regularly produces published learning articles.
  • The registered manager had a strong focus on high-standards of care and safety within the wider field of aesthetic medicine, demonstrated by development of new best evidence-based practice guidelines that have been disseminated to external peers, and adopting a holistic approach to care that takes into account patients’ physical, emotional and social needs.
  • The practice made significant efforts to promote equality and inclusion in care for black, Asian and mixed-race people and improve outcomes for them through practice policy and culture. The practice policies and culture supported both patients and staff to be safe, protected and respected.
  • Patients reported high levels of care and kindness provided at the practice. The importance placed on this at the practice was evident from staff interviews and the holistic nature of practice ethos, vision, and policies, which strived to ensure patients were treated in an individualised way.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

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

12 April 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 12 April 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Adonia Medical Clinic offers primary care appointments for non-acute health conditions. The primary care service has only been seeing patients since January 2018 although it has been registered since August 2017. The service has treated just two patients to date.

The clinic is run by the medical director who founded the clinic and is a doctor. They contract with a qualified GP on a locum basis to provide primary care consultations.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of the provision of advice or treatment by, or under the supervision of, a medical practitioner. Adonia Medical Clinic predominantly provides aesthetic cosmetic treatments which are exempt by law from CQC regulation. Therefore, we were only able to inspect the primary medical service and not the aesthetic cosmetic services.

The medical director is the registered manager of the clinic. 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.

Our key findings were:

  • Systems were in place to protect people from avoidable harm and abuse.
  • There were systems in place to identify, review and learn from mistakes or incidents. The staff understood their responsibilities under the duty of candour.
  • The clinical team were aware of current evidence based guidance.
  • The clinical team were qualified and had the skills, experience and knowledge to deliver effective care and treatment.
  • The practice had only seen two primary care patients. General feedback from people using the clinic indicated high levels of satisfaction with the clinic and staff overall.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available although some information was incorrect.
  • The doctor had a clear vision to provide a high quality, personalised service.
  • There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of service provision.

There was an area where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Review the quality of medical note keeping to ensure records are clearly dated and signed.