Oviva UK Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same

This service scored 82 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

The tier 3 care pathway was set for a maximum of 24 months, although people could leave prior to that if their weight loss goals were met. The provider had a number of complementary services to the prescribing of weight loss medicine. This included access to diet, exercise and mental health support from healthcare professionals, which were available to all patients as required. The service had identified through service user feedback that some people were anxious about ceasing treatment. The service was trialling a programme of gradual reduction of medicine dosage until secession, to ensure that people were gradually acclimatised to being medicine free.

The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The provider had tailored its services to meet the diverse needs of service users.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard. The service had translated information leaflets into the ten most spoken languages used by people using the service.

The service was exceptional at enabling people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They always involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The service had a clear process to ensure that any service user dissatisfaction at the service was followed up, and complaints could be generated by staff at the service who were speaking to service users, with their consent. We saw that feedback of this kind was actively sought, and we saw examples of how the service had adapted in relation to people’s feedback, particularly in better explaining the criteria to access the service.

We saw complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy, and learning points from complaints were appended to the complaints documentation. Learning was evident, and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback, including complaints.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The service operated 12 hours a day (8am to 8pm) during which consultations were available, in order to meet the needs of working service users. The service was under its 18-week target time to commence treatment following referral for each of the last 12 months. In the longer term, the service was aiming towards people being seen by a clinician for the first time within 2 weeks of referral, a target that it had set itself to provide faster access. At the time of the inspection this target was not yet met, but waiting times had been improving following a large-scale recruitment of staff in the summer of 2025.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Feedback provided by people using the service was positive. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their care.