The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Cleveland Clinic Portland Place Outpatient Centre

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

24 Portland Place, London, W1B 1LU 07732 689330

Provided and run by:
Cleveland Clinic London Ltd

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Cleveland Clinic Portland Place Outpatient Centre 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 Cleveland Clinic Portland Place Outpatient Centre, you can give feedback on this service.

11 January 2023 - 18 January 2023

During a routine inspection

This was the first time we inspected the service. We rated it as good because:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available to suit patients' needs.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of the patient population, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

  • In diagnostic imaging, we did not see any posters or information on-site providing information to patients and their carers about the radiation used during common imaging procedures.
  • In outpatients, the did not have a process in place to ensure the confidentiality of patients attending remote consultations.

11 January 2023

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall.

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 unannounced comprehensive inspection of the Portland Place Outpatient Centre, Cleveland Clinic London as part of our inspection programme. The Portland Place Outpatient Centre provides outpatient services; diagnostic services including radiology; and a GP service. The Portland Place Outpatient Centre has not previously been inspected.

This report focuses on our findings in relation to the GP service at Portland Place Outpatient Centre. The GP service is a primary care medical service, open to patients of any age.

Our key findings were:

  • The service had clear systems in place to safeguard patients identified as being at risk of abuse or neglect. However, systems for checking parental authority were not consistently in place and were not formalised.
  • Patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed.
  • The GPs were able to readily refer patients for further diagnostic testing and specialist consultation as required on the same site or through the provider’s nearby hospital service.
  • Care records were generally written and managed in a way that kept patients safe. However, the GPs did not always clearly record the ‘safety netting’ advice provided to patients or clarify the presence or absence of ‘red flag’ symptoms (that is, symptoms that might indicate a more serious illness). Safety-netting refers to the advice given to a patient about the actions to take if their condition fails to improve or deteriorates after the consultation.
  • Patients were treated with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • We saw evidence of consistently positive feedback from patients using the GP service.
  • The service actively sought and acted on feedback from patients using the GP service to improve the service.
  • The service used information about care and treatment to make improvements and the GPs were actively involved in leading quality improvement activity.
  • The service was accessible. Patients were able to consult with a GP within an appropriate timescale for their needs.
  • Staff we spoke with understood the vision, values and strategy and their role in achieving them.
  • The GP service was underpinned by clear systems of governance and processes for managing risk, issues and performance.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Introduce a consistent system to check that adults accompanying children to see a GP always have parental authority.
  • Take steps to consistently record and audit ‘safety netting’ advice given to patients and any ‘red flag’ symptoms in the patient notes in line with General Medical Council guidelines.
  • Take steps to ensure that staff, including non-clinical staff, who have GP patient-facing roles, are aware of the risks of sepsis and relevant protocols.
  • Formalise a policy on the range of prescribed medicines where the patient’s NHS GP should be kept informed for safety reasons and the appropriate response if patients refuse consent to share this information with them.
  • As the GP service develops, increase clinical improvement activity and obtain more focused patient feedback on the quality of clinical care.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

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