You are here

Holderness Laser Clinic Limited - Hull Road Hessle

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 23 January 2014
Date of Publication: 18 February 2014
Inspection Report published 18 February 2014 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 23 January 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

People's needs were assessed and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual treatment plan.

We spoke with the manager, one member of staff and one person who used the service about the treatment and support provided by the service. We also looked at treatment records and associated documents to find evidence that care and treatment needs had been met. We reviewed the systems used by the provider to capture feedback from people who used the service. This included satisfaction surveys which were sent out annually.

One person who spoke with us said “I have been coming here for repeat treatments for a number of months. I am really pleased with the results that I am getting and I find the staff are very supportive and answer any questions I may have in a straightforward way.” We looked at 25 of the satisfaction surveys that were sent out in the last 12 months. Every response was extremely positive about the service and the treatment and support people had received. Comments included:

“Brilliant staff, amazing and so pleased with the results”

“Lovely, friendly staff”

“Would recommend to others for Laser Treatment”

“Great welcome every time, staff are very knowledgeable on systems and treatments, great experience.”

The manager told us that the consultations and treatments were carried out in either of the treatment rooms located on the ground floor and the first floor, away from the general therapy areas. One of the laser technicians told us they received training and update sessions from the manufacturer of the laser equipment and the manager said that they were able to contact the laser company’s clinical specialists if they required specific information or clarification on any treatments. The manager also had contact with other medical specialists if they needed to seek further advice.

One person told us “Staff ask you every time you visit if you have been sunbathing or used a sun bed since the last session. They also ask if you have used a fake tan.” Discussion with the manager about this indicated these questions were asked as part of the risk assessment process to reduce the risk of burns to people who received treatment. We saw that notices with these questions were on the lasers in both treatment rooms to remind staff to ask before starting treatment.

The clinic had written and computerised notes for people who received treatment. We saw that information about the people who used the service such as a medical history, current medications and any allergies had been obtained. Discussion with the manager indicated that information about costs of treatment was discussed with people at their consultation visit to the clinic. We also saw that information on costs was available in the treatment rooms and on the clinic’s website. Discussion with one person who used the service confirmed that information on their health and wellbeing was updated at each treatment session and costs were fully explained to them at the consultation session.

The treatment records contained information about people’s attendance and follow on visits and the laser treatment each person had received. Discussion with the manager and information we received indicated that at the consultation stage each person had a ‘test patch’ to ascertain treatment was appropriate. This was also confirmed to us during our conversation with the person who used the service. After the test patch people had to wait for between seven and twenty one days (depending on their skin type) prior to treatment to ensure there were no adverse reactions. Evidence was seen that before and after photographs of people were taken at the consultation visit and after treatment with the signed consent of people who used the service. The information form indicated the photographs would be kept in people’s files and only used for assessing treatment results.

Discussion with one laser technician indicated they were responsible for reviewing people’s notes to ensure a