You are here

Sk:n - Leicester Gallowtree Gate

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 25 June 2013
Date of Publication: 27 July 2013
Inspection Report published 27 July 2013 PDF

People should be safe from harm from unsafe or unsuitable equipment (outcome 11)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are not at risk of harm from unsafe or unsuitable equipment (medical and non-medical equipment, furnishings or fittings).
  • Benefit from equipment that is comfortable and meets their needs.

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 25 June 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People were protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment.

Reasons for our judgement

People were protected from unsafe or unsuitable equipment because the provider had systems for maintaining and checking the equipment. The provider uses laser machines for treatments including hair removal, acne, broken veins and tattoo removal. We checked two of the 10 laser machines used at the clinic. Both had labelling to remind staff using them of how to use them safely. They were kept in treatment rooms that had appropriate signage to warn people not to enter when the machines were in use. Each machine had a log book recording every occasion it was used. The provider had a laser protection advisor (LPA) who had produced local rules for each of the machines. These are the procedures that should be followed to ensure the machines are used safely. One staff member told us the LPA visited regularly to check compliance with the local rules and to provide support and advice. The provider had no other local arrangements to check proper procedures were followed. The provider may find it useful to note that there was no evidence of routine checks to ensure all staff using the machines were following the local rules.

We spoke with a nurse who was designated as the location’s laser protection supervisor. This meant they were responsible for ensuring the laser machines were used safely. They gave support and advice to staff who were trained to use the machines. We spoke with two staff who provided treatment using the machines. They told us they had relevant training to use the machines. They had training to provide specific treatments using specific machines. One staff person explained that they had to complete a certain volume of treatment to maintain their competence. If they did not do enough treatments, they had to do refresher training before they could continue. This was updated regularly to reflect any changes in treatment methods and to keep their skills and knowledge up to date. This meant people were protected from the risks of unsafe treatment using laser machines, because staff were trained and competent and had access to support and advice.

We looked at audit records from the last three months. These showed whether staff had completed all the relevant safety checks and records when using the laser machines for treatment. Staff told us that issues raised by these audits were discussed at team meetings or were raised in staff memoranda. The provider may find it useful to note there was no evidence of action taken to address issues raised by the audits. Some issues were repeated in each of the three months’ audits we looked at. This meant audits were not being used to ensure all staff were following procedures to protect people from harm.

There was enough equipment to promote the comfort of people who use the service. We did not speak with people using the service about this standard, but we asked staff how long people had to wait for treatment. Two staff explained to us that the machines they had reflected the local population. The provider measured people's skin tone by using the Fitzpatrick scale which is a recognised tool. The provider had sufficient equipment for people with a range of skin tones. Staff told us they had enough equipment to provide treatments when people needed it. People could have treatment when they needed it and the most appropriate equipment was available to meet the needs of the local population.