• Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Archived: Bupa Centre - Austin Friars

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

2-6 Austin Friars, London, EC2N 2HD (020) 7628 4001

Provided and run by:
Bupa Occupational Health Limited

Important: This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All Inspections

16 May 2019

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 announced comprehensive inspection at the Bupa Centre – Austin Friars as part of our inspection programme.

The service provides private health assessment and GP treatments to fee-paying and corporate 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 it provides. 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. The Bupa Clinic – Austin Friars provides a range of physiotherapy interventions, which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we did not inspect or report on these services.

The service has a 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.

As part of the inspection, we gathered feedback from patients using the service. Fourteen people provided feedback about the service and were positive about the support received and the friendly and caring nature of the staff.

Our key findings were:

  • There was clear systems and processes to safeguard patients from abuse. All staff had received training appropriate to their role.
  • There was oversight of the risks associated with the service. For example, premises, health and safety, fire, legionella and emergency medicines.
  • Staff members were knowledgeable and had the experience and skills required to carry out their roles.
  • Staff received regular appraisals, one-to-one conversations and career development conversations. All staff had completed mandatory training and were not able to see patients if training had become out-of-date. Staff were given protected time to complete training.
  • An infection control and environmental audit been completed. There were systems in place to manage any infection control concerns.
  • Clinical records were detailed and held securely. The service did not keep paper records.
  • There was regular service meetings and formal communication with staff. There were also regular meetings with the wider Bupa organisation.
  • The provider dealt with complaints in an appropriate and timely manner. Learning from complaints was shared with staff and the wider organisation.
  • The practice made improvements from all significant events and incidents. The Bupa quality team analysed all significant events and incidents across the organisation and learning was fed back to the service to drive improvement.
  • Patients were encouraged to give feedback at every appointment and any patient scoring the service with less than seven out of ten were contacted to give more detailed feedback. This feedback was analysed both service and organisation and made improvements and changes according to this feedback.
  • Health advisors contacted all patients who had received health assessments following their appointment to follow up on any lifestyle advice or treatment. This was also used as another method of capturing patient feedback.
  • The service had created systems to ensure abnormal results were actioned and followed up in a timely way by using weekly audits. All urgent referrals were followed up by administration staff.
  • The service used software to monitor and track health and safety activities. Remedial actions were logged, and compliance was monitored. This included tracking health and safety, building management and fire. The system flagged any assessments or actions that were due to be completed.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGPChief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

5 September 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 5 September 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the centre was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Bupa Centre – Austin Friars is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the regulated activities of Diagnostic and Screening procedures; Transport, triage and medical advice provided remotely and Treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The address of the registered centre is Bupa Austin – Centre Austin Friars, 2-6 Austin Friars, London, EC2N 2HD. https://www.bupa.com.

The centre manager is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the centre. 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 centre is run.

As part of our inspection we asked for CQC comment cards to be completed by patients prior to our inspection. We received 11 comment cards which were all positive about the standard of care received at the centre.

Our key findings were:

  • The centre routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided.
  • The centre had a clear system for managing and learning from complaints and incidents. However, they were not following their own policies regarding the timescales in which incidents should be managed. Learning from complaints and incidents was widely shared among all staff and other relevant organisations.
  • The centre had a programme of audits carried out by the organisation’s quality improvement team. Additionally, the centre undertook ad-hoc local audits.
  • Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
  • Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
  • There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
  • The centre had an overarching governance framework in place, including policies and protocols which had been developed at corporate level.
  • The centre had good systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen.

There were areas where the provider should make some improvements.

The provider should:

  • Investigate incidents in line with the organisation’s policies and procedures.
  • Improve ways to have an internal process to improve clinicians' individual performance.

26 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with one person who used the service who told us, 'they are very professional and polite. I had confidence in them and it [the service] met my expectations.' People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. People were asked to give their consent before they received care or treatment and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

The clinic was run by qualified doctors, trained health advisers, a radiographer, management and administrative staff. People received a Bupa health assessment, giving them a detailed profile of their overall health including areas of increased risk to them and advice on how to improve their health and fitness.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. The provider had taken steps to provide the service in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

6 September 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who attended the centre and both were complimentary about their service. The service had also received mostly positive feedback from other people who had recently used the service. Their comments included, "Overall, a positive experience. All good". "Extremely satisfied. Thoroughly enjoyed the experience".