Mollie Elise Aesthetics

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 staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them with advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services when appropriate to achieve this.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as good.

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.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Clinical staff used templates when conducting assessments to support the review of people’s wider health and wellbeing.

Staff understood the individual and cultural needs of people. Reception staff used digital alerts within the care records system to highlight any allergies and specific individual needs, such as the requirement for longer appointments or for a translator or British sign language interpreter to be present.

Staff assessed and monitored patients’ comfort during treatments to ensure patients were comfortable and pain control (where appropriate) was effective. Patients were advised about possible expected and unexpected side-effects following treatment. For example, following some treatments side effects could include potential localised pain, potential temporary numbness and residual swelling.

Staff were aware of body dysmorphia and patients potentially presenting with this condition. Body dysmorphic disorder is a mental disorder characterised by the obsessive idea that some aspect of the person's body or appearance is severely flawed and therefore warrants exceptional measures to hide or fix it on a daily basis.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based practice. We saw care records which demonstrated staff assessed needs and delivered care and treatment in line with relevant current legislation, standards and guidance.

Patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. Where appropriate this included their clinical needs and their mental and physical wellbeing. The clinician shared various examples which evidenced delivery of individualised care. For example, people who were discouraged from non-surgical thread lifts as the treatment was either deemed unnecessary or the results the patient desired would be unachievable.

Staff worked well as a team to support patients. Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The clinic worked with other services to ensure continuity of care, including where clinical tasks were delegated to other services.

The clinic supported patients to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff spoke of how they supported patients to feel better and live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Patient feedback we reviewed included positive outcomes about treatment they had received that made significant difference to their lives.

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

Patients were advised about possible expected and unexpected side-effects following treatment. All consultations for treatment were via face-to-face appointments. If the patient required a follow up appointment due to concerns, this was arranged urgently.

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

Attendance at the clinic was initiated by patients. Those, who expressed an interest in taking up treatment, were given sufficient information about the range of treatments available to reach a decision on whether to progress.

We saw the clinic monitored the process for obtaining consent appropriately. Staff understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making. The service asked patients to sign consent forms to indicate they understood the treatment fees and any risks involved. Patients were asked for consent to share details of their consultation and any medicines prescribed with their registered GP when they accessed services.