The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Woodford Medical Limited - 1a Langford Arch

Unit 1A Langford Larch, London Road, Pampisford, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, CB22 3FX (01245) 227983

Provided and run by:
Woodford Medical Limited

All Inspections

6 February 2014

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with seven people who used the service. They each told us they were very happy with the treatment they had received and were totally satisfied with every aspect of the service. People told us they felt in control of the treatment and had plenty of opportunity to make any enquiry about their treatment. They said they had been fully involved in making decisions. One person said, "I would not go anywhere else for this treatment. The doctor providing the treatment and the whole service is fantastic".

The treatment and care provided to people was well planned and person focussed. We found that people made all the decisions about the type and frequency of their treatment. Care and treatment had been recorded within people's individual plans and included all of the treatment details that had been provided to them.

The premises were visibly very clean and tidy and had been well maintained. The building was protected from the risk of fire and from the risk of cross infection. The clinic was a comfortable environment which people told us they enjoyed.

We were satisfied that should any person make a compliant, the provider had a proven system of responding to complainants within an appropriate timeframe.

13 March 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we found that before any treatments had been carried out, the procedures involved had been explained and people were asked to give their written consent. Both of the people that we talked with told us that they had signed a consent form before they had received any treatments.

Before any treatments took place people attended a free consultation and discussed what they would like the treatment to achieve. They were then given information about what treatment would be best and any risks to their health associated with it. One person told us, "The staff were exceptionally good and realistic about what could be achieved". The people we talked with confirmed that they had been given aftercare advice.

We found that the equipment used for treating people had been suitably maintained and operated by staff who had the correct training. One person told us, "The staff are super professional and very competent" and that they were "Knowledgeable and able to answer questions about the treatments".

There were procedures in place to monitor the quality of the service.