Illuminate Skin Clinics Ltd

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe and effective staffing during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People using the service usually had their medicines prescribed and administered safely. The provider had policies and procedures which supported staff to do this, however they were not always followed.

People were encouraged to be actively involved in their care and treatment. We saw records which showed changes to treatment occurring where the desired effect wasn’t being achieved.

Medicines were stored safely and securely. Temperature monitoring was completed routinely for both the room and the medicines fridge.

Where the clinic held medicines for use in emergency situations, these were stored securely and accessible to staff when providing treatment.

The provider had an appropriate screening tool to ensure that when a medicine was prescribed it was done so appropriately.

There was a process to gain consent for sharing information with a person’s GP. However, when reviewing records, we saw that despite the answer given, the provider did not routinely provide letters to a person’s GP to inform them of the care and treatment they were currently providing. Without this information, the GP has an incomplete record of the currently prescribed medicines or any conditions that have been treated privately that may impact on future care.We spoke about this with the registered manager at the time.

The service employed a GP who worked at the location. When reviewing private prescription records, we observed that some prescriptions were made for staff or family members. Whilst this is allowed, we found that records were sometimes unclear about why the prescription was needed or if the person’s GP had been informed about the decision to prescribe specific treatments.We spoke about this with the registered manager at the time.