You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 27 March 2013
Date of Publication: 30 May 2013
Inspection Report published 30 May 2013 PDF

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 27 March 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with staff.

Our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Reasons for our judgement

The provider ensured that people who used the service understood, consented and knew how to change their decisions before providing care and treatment. The patient records we reviewed contained consent forms that had been signed by the person and the doctor.

The patient we met at the clinic told us "you are given an immense amount of information and the doctor makes sure you understand it ".

We read a copy of the information pack that all prospective patients received about the treatments provided by Integrated Health Screening. This included information about the types of treatments available at the clinic and, what to expect from the service. This meant people were able to use this information to make an informed decision about whether to use the service or not.

We saw that people were asked to sign a consent form before their procedure. The provider had added further detail to the consent form after our first visit. The form now more clearly showed when people had given their consent. It also showed that the proposed treatments had been explained to them a way that they understood.

The doctor told us consent was a continual process discussed with patients at all stages of their treatment. We saw written information in four patient’s medical records that confirmed information was provided to them before their consultation.

People were informed that some of the medicines administered were not licensed and were made aware that where the medicines and herbal remedies had not been subjected to clinical trials; claims of beneficial effects could not be made. The possible side effects of the treatments offered were explained to people; therefore they were fully informed about the treatment being offered.