Updated 20 November 2025
Date of Assessment: 23 January 2026. Dr Matla Aesthetics provides a private aesthetics service for fee paying clients. This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services they provide. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services, and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Dr Matla Aesthetics provides a range of non-surgical cosmetic interventions, for example dermal filler injections, anti-wrinkle treatments and non-prescription topical treatment for skin conditions, including those provided from an alternative address, which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we did not inspect, or report on these services. At the time of the inspection, they offered thread face lifts, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for hair loss and male sexual dysfunction and medical treatment for migraines, and hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating), which were within scope of the regulations.
The lead clinician is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. People were protected and kept safe. Staff understood and managed risks. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained and any risks mitigated. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience. Managers made sure staff received training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. Staff managed medicines well and involved people in planning any changes.
The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. The ethos was to build genuine trust with patients in meeting their wishes for cosmetic enhancements as part of a larger decision to improve the overall quality of their life. Patient feedback demonstrated good levels of satisfaction with their experiences of the service. The lead doctor was knowledgeable about issues and priorities relating to the clinical quality and future of services. The service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. There was a focus on learning, improvement and sustainability. Quality improvement helped to provide assurance of the safety and quality of the service.
Although the provider displayed their CQC ratings in the service reception and had included a link to the report on the service website, we found this did not fully meet the requirements of the relevant regulation. They had not displayed conspicuously on their website, the service rating and the date on which this rating was given by CQC. The provider told us they would address this soon.
Since the last inspection, the practice had made improvements and is no longer in breach of Good governance. This included developing a new suite of policies and procedures and developing and embedding a set of risk assessments, assurance checks and audits to support the safe and effective delivery of care.