You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at The Lawrence Clinic. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.


Inspection carried out on 27 September and 8 October 2013

During a routine inspection

People who used the service told us they had experienced appropriate treatment and care. One person said, �I�m more than happy with the care and couldn�t be happier with the result.� Another person said, �It was a good experience and they put the patient first. They did the right things at the right time.�

People told us they had opportunities to ask questions and these had always been answered. One person said they had requested some additional information and were provided with this promptly. Two people said although they were satisfied with their care and treatment they would have liked to have received more information about their recovery.

The provider had taken steps to provide care and treatment in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. People we spoke with said they had been comfortable when they received care and treatment. Consultations were always held in private so their confidentiality was maintained.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

The provider had an effective system to monitor the quality of the service people received. One member of staff said, "We always make sure we follow procedure and I have every confidence we are doing everything properly." Another member of staff said, "Patients get good continuity. We have a specialist team who are longstanding.� Staff confirmed regular discussions took place where they talked about care and safety.

Inspection carried out on 8, 14 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We were not able to speak with patients who used the service because there was not a clinic for podiatry on the days of our inspection. We reviewed three care records and found that in each file a detailed consent form was in place which included the potential risks and complications and how their personal information may be used. We reviewed the feedback which patients provided and found patients' experiences to be positive.

We also saw that each patient had been asked to consent to their GP being contacted with regards to the treatment they were undergoing. Patients were protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment because the provider ensured maintenance and regular checks were undertaken. Staff spoken with and records seen confirmed that staff were appropriately trained and supported to undertake their roles.

Our observations of the treatment room demonstrated to us that it was clean, free from any unpleasant odours and that infection control practices were in place. Hand gels were readily available and cleaning equipment and wipes were in place. This ensured that cleaning in between people having treatments was carried out.

We also found that staff received appropriate training and support and that the service had various methods in place to monitor the quality of service it provided. An appropriate complaints system was in place.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)