The Scan Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that people and communities had the best possible outcomes because their needs were assessed. We checked that people’s care, support and treatment reflected these needs and any protected equality characteristics, ensuring people were at the centre of their care. We also looked for evidence that leaders instilled a culture of improvement, where understanding current outcomes and exploring best practice was part of their everyday work.

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with other agencies involved in people’s care for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.

At our last inspection we did not rate this key question. At this assessment we have rated it as good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

We have not awarded this service a score for Effective.

Find out about when we will not publish a key question score and what we look at when we assess Effective.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Assessments considered service users’ health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs, to ensure they received care or treatment which achieved good outcomes.

We reviewed 4 service user records which showed staff recorded all relevant information and completed assessments to support care. The service completed quarterly record keeping audits. The service scored mostly 100% in the record keeping audits for the last 3 quarters (covering the period between January and September 2025).

Staff also had access to translation services when necessary to ensure that service users were involved in their care.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Staff did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Service users received care, treatment, and support that was evidence-based and in line with good practice standards. This included individualised risk assessments to support holistic care.

Staff followed policies to plan and deliver care according to best practice and national guidance. Policies and protocols were in line with current legislation and national evidence-based guidance from professional organisations, such as the British Medical Ultrasound Society (BMUS).

The service had completed a policy simplification audit in July 2025. This was following staff feedback which indicated many of the company’s policies were complex and difficult to follow.

The service stored policies in a folder accessible by staff. We reviewed a sample of the policies during our assessment and found they were up to date, compliant with current guidance and evidence-based practice. In addition, the policies were clear and easy for staff to understand.

The service monitored the effectiveness of care and treatment through a routine programme of audits. For example, in July 2025, the service conducted an audit of the latex allergy status of service users undergoing transvaginal scans in a 6-month period. The service identified the number of service users with latex allergy during the period. This helped to determine the amount of non-latex probe covers required to care for service users.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan and deliver people’s care and treatment. Staff held regular meetings to discuss people and improve their care.

Staff worked across health care disciplines and with other agencies when required to care for people. This included regular liaison with GPs, maternity services and private laboratories.

The service had connections with local NHS early pregnancy units and referred individuals where this was required, and they had permission to do so.

Staff used referral pathways to ensure women received timely on-going care, such as when they identified foetal abnormalities or a miscarriage.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were supported to manage their own health, care, and wellbeing needs by staff who understood their needs and preferences.

Staff discussed scan results with service users and provided advice on lifestyle changes where appropriate.

Pregnant women and birthing people had access to relevant information about pre-conception care and treatment on the providers website and through leaflets provided during their visit.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. Staff ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Staff monitored care effectiveness and used findings to improve outcomes. Managers and staff conducted repeated audits and quality improvement projects to improve service user outcomes.

The service conducted quarterly clinical image and report quality assurance audit. The audit scored the quality of images and report for each sonographer from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). Available audit reports for the period between January 2025 and June 2025 showed that clinicians mostly scored between 4 (good) and 5 (excellent) for the quality of their images and report.

The service had a quick turnaround for reporting times. Obstetric scan reports were available immediately after the scan while all other reports were available within 24 hours.

We reviewed the urgent care audit sheet which showed results of urgent scans were sent to the service user and relevant health care provider on the same day of the test.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People understood their rights around consent to the care and treatment they were offered. People told us staff explained care and treatment options and gained verbal consent for physical assessments.

We observed service users being supported by staff, who took time to explain treatments and options available to them.

Staff we spoke to understood the relevant consent and decision-making requirements of legislation and guidance, including the Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act 2005, and they knew who to contact for advice.

Staff had completed Mental Capacity Act & Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards training. Staff could describe and knew how to access the policy and get accurate advice on the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).