Vysana Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as good.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

There were systems and processes to assess people’s health, care and wellbeing needs to ensure the care and treatment was effective. The consultation process required people to complete information regarding their health and wellbeing before their appointment so this could be assessed by the provider and discussed at the appointment. A thorough medical history was also obtained before any assessment to ensure appropriate care, treatment and prescribing. People said they were confident their individual needs had been appropriately assessed and were understood by the provider. Consultation notes were recorded for each service user where their needs and preferences were noted. For example, images and interpretation was available to support communication and longer appointment times was possible. People that had additional needs were discussed in the daily huddle to ensure their needs were met.

Vysana Clinic planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Daily huddle meetings were held every morning between the provider and clinic manager to discuss the latest updates and any concerns. Policies were in place to ensure the provider delivered care in line with national evidence-based guidance. To help stay up to date, the provider also worked locum shifts in remote urgent care. We reviewed consultation notes that demonstrated care was provided in line with evidence-based good practice.

The provider and clinic manager were supportive of each other to ensure they had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The provider had processes in place to share information between the service and the patient’s registered GP when required. The provider was the only clinician that worked at this service so had developed a network of support with other organisations that offered regular contact to support to one another.

Health promotion material was observed in the waiting area. For example, posters about exercise promotion, menopause support, diabetes management and sun safety were on display. Details about a neighbourhood mental health café were also accessible. Healthcare articles were regularly published on the service’s website giving people advice about how to lead a healthier life or manage their symptoms better.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They aspired to ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, and met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Audits had been completed that identified positive improvements. During our clinical review, our CQC GP Specialist Advisor reviewed a set of patient records and found that although comprehensive patient histories and clear documentation of examination findings were noted, necessary follow ups were not always evident. The provider expressed that the appropriate follow-ups had taken place but was unable to provide evidence of this during the site visit.

Vysana Clinic informed people about their rights around consent. Staff understood and respected the importance of obtaining consent before treatment was provided. Patients received information about their care and treatment in a way they could understand. Documentation relating to individuals was treated with confidentiality and in line with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Records were maintained so that they could be shared with other providers or organisations if required with the patient’s consent. It was evident from speaking with the provider that they understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making. If the provider felt a treatment would not provide the outcome that the patient desired, the treatment was refused.