• Community
  • Community healthcare service

Bye Bye Tongue Tie

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Citygate, Gallowgate, Newcastle Upon Tyne, NE1 4PA 07929 564078

Provided and run by:
Miss Tara Scarlett Lucienne de Meza

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Bye Bye Tongue Tie 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 Bye Bye Tongue Tie, you can give feedback on this service.

10 May 2022

During a routine inspection

We carried out an inspection of Bye Bye Tongue-tie using our comprehensive methodology on 10th May 2022. This was followed by telephone interviews with parents of babies treated by the tongue-tie practitioner. In this report, we use the term ‘parent’ to describe either the birth parent or primary carer of the baby.

This was the first time we inspected the service. We rated it as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well led:

  • The practitioner had training in key skills, understood how to protect babies and their parents from abuse, and managed safety well.
  • Risk assessments were completed for all babies using an evidence-based standard assessment tool. The practitioner recognised risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records.
  • According to feedback we received, the practitioner treated babies and their parents with compassion and kindness, took account of their individual needs, and helped parents understand the condition.
  • The practitioner provided emotional support to parents and made it easy for them to give feedback. Parents could access the practitioner when they needed it and did not have to wait long for assessment or treatment.
  • The practitioner followed national guidance and there was evidence of quality monitoring through regular audit.
  • The process of seeking and recording consent was thorough and included sufficient information to allow for informed decisions to be made by the parent.
  • There was a high level of aftercare available to parents following the procedure.

However:

  • While the practitioner controlled infection risks well, we noted a small stock of haemostatic dressings (designed to reduce blood loss from a cut in the skin) that were out of date. This meant the dressings may not have been fully effective.
  • Although suitable arrangements existed, the practitioner should seek written confirmation of level four safeguarding support from her employing trust or local authority.