Vysana Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination. This is the first inspection for this service since its registration. This key question has been rated as good.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider was committed to delivering patient-centred care. The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. During the initial onboarding process, patients were given the opportunity to express their specific needs and preferences. This information was recorded in the patient notes to ensure these preferences were acknowledged and addressed. The provider told us that tailoring treatments to meet the individual needs, preferences and goals was imperative. People who provided feedback through our ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process told us that the provider always took the time to listen and ensure their expectations were met.

The service understood the diverse needs of the local community and how treatment needed to be individualised and delivered in a way that met a person’s assessed needs. The provider had built up working relationships and communication with other professionals, so patients received person centred care in a seamless way. Referral letters to specialists were comprehensive and completed in a timely manner. If the provider needed to cancel an appointment due to unforeseen circumstances, they could send patients to the NHS or refer to another clinician to ensure continuity of the patients care.

Vysana Clinic supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. During the booking process, patients were asked about their communication needs to ensure the appropriate arrangements were in place. For example, interpretation could be arranged and written information was available in a range of accessible formats. This information was clearly recorded in the patient notes. The website offered useful information outlining the services offered, the ability to book an appointment and health and wellbeing articles. The service had a complaints policy that was displayed on their website and in the clinic. The policy included details about an independent complaints service so patients could refer to them if they were not satisfied with the service’s complaint response. Patients who provided feedback through our ‘Give Feedback on Care’ process told us that they were given clear explanations about their treatment in a way they understood. People felt the provider was very knowledgeable about the treatments provided and was available to answer any questions they had.

People were encouraged to leave feedback and share ideas about their care and treatment to ensure the service met the needs of the patients. There were comment cards in the waiting area alongside a box they could be returned in. The service shared their feedback analysis that evidenced high patient satisfaction. Feedback emphasised that people felt listened to, their questions were answered clearly and expectations were managed realistically. The provider expressed they want to continue to actively invite patients to leave feedback. The service had not received any complaints since registering with the service, however, there was a complaints policy in place should they need to refer to it.

The clinic operates Monday to Saturday. The clinic is all accessible on ground floor level and suitable for wheelchair users. Although there were no designated disabled car parking spaces, the car park is directly outside the clinic with plenty of spaces available. There were no steps to the main entrance and a doorbell to bring attention for assistance to open the door. We received positive feedback from a patient that had mobility issues who expressed their positive experience using this service. People could make an enquiry or book an appointment either online or by phone call. Appointments were at flexible times to suit the needs of the service user. For example, the provider told us they could provide appointments later in the evening to accommodate a patient’s needs.

People were very positive about their experience using the service and the outcomes of their treatment. If people did have any concerns about the outcomes of their treatment, they would be invited back to the clinic for a further consultation. The provider treated people as individuals and complied with legal equality and human rights requirements, including avoiding discrimination, having regard to the needs of people with different protected characteristics and making reasonable adjustments to support equity in experience and outcomes. The provider had proactively sought ways to address any barriers to improve people’s experiences. For example, they used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service, including those who did not have access to the internet.

People were supported to plan their care and treatment and the provider ensured patients had enough time to make informed decisions about their future. The provider ensured they kept consultation notes for each person they treated, and treatment plans were discussed with service users and modified as needed.