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

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as inadequate. At this assessment, the rating has changed, the service is now rated good in this Key question.

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.

At our last assessment, we found assessments and clinical records did not always contain sufficient information to support effective care and treatment. During this assessment, we found improvements had been made, with comprehensive assessments and clear documentation to support treatment decisions.

Staff made sure people's care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. We reviewed a sample of people’s records and found consultations were comprehensive and appropriately documented. Records included relevant information such as medical history, current medicines, allergies, treatment goals and any factors which may affect a person’s suitability for treatment.

Clinical records demonstrated that treatment options, expected outcomes, risks and aftercare requirements were discussed with people before treatment was provided. Care and treatment were personalised to meet individual needs and preferences, and patients were involved in decisions about their care. Feedback was positive, with people telling us they felt listened to and involved.

At our last assessment, we found policies, clinical guidance and audit processes did not always effectively support the delivery of evidence-based care. During this assessment, we found improvements had been made, with updated policies, stronger clinical oversight and effective audit processes in place. 

Staff planned and delivered people's care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. The provider maintained comprehensive policies and procedures which reflected current guidance and were regularly reviewed. Clinical records demonstrated that treatment options, risks, benefits, expected outcomes and aftercare requirements were discussed with patients before treatment was provided. The provider completed audits of clinical records and prescribing practices, and findings were used to support learning, identify improvements and promote the delivery of safe and effective care.

At our last assessment, we found communication and information sharing with other healthcare professionals was not always effective. During this assessment, we found improvements had been made, with clear processes in place to support collaborative working and continuity of care. 

The provider had processes in place to support communication with other healthcare professionals where appropriate. People were asked for consent to share relevant information with their GP, and where consent was provided, details of treatments were communicated to support continuity of care. Where people chose not to consent to information being shared with their GP, staff discussed the reasons for information sharing and explained the potential benefits and risks of this decision, enabling people to make an informed decision. Policies and procedures included guidance on information sharing and staff were able to describe the processes they followed. Staff worked collaboratively and shared information appropriately to ensure patients received safe, coordinated and effective care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff provided people with information and advice relevant to their treatment and individual needs, supporting them to make informed decisions about their care. Consultations included discussions about treatment goals, expected outcomes, risks and aftercare requirements. People were provided with information to help them achieve the best possible outcomes from treatment and were encouraged to contact the service if they required further advice or support. People’s feedback indicated that staff took time to explain treatments clearly and supported people to make decisions that were right for them.

At our last assessment, we found systems for monitoring treatment outcomes and recording follow-up information were not always effective. During this assessment, we found improvements had been made, with clear processes in place to monitor outcomes, review treatment effectiveness and support continuous improvement. 

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Where appropriate, people were offered follow-up appointments to review treatment outcomes, discuss their experience and identify any ongoing support needs. Staff monitored the effectiveness of treatments and took appropriate action where required. The provider used information from people’s feedback, follow-up reviews and clinical audits to evaluate outcomes and identify opportunities for improvement.

Staff obtained and documented written consent before providing any treatment. Consent forms were comprehensive, accurate and specific to the treatment being undertaken, ensuring patients were provided with the information needed to make informed decisions about their care. This included information about the proposed treatment, expected outcomes, potential risks and aftercare requirements.

We reviewed consent documentation and found it reflected the treatments offered by the service. Leaders and staff were able to clearly explain the process for obtaining informed consent and the steps they would take to ensure patients understood the information provided before proceeding with treatment. The provider had arrangements in place to support people whose first language was not English, including access to translated treatment information where required. This helped ensure people were able to fully understand their treatment options and provide informed consent before care was delivered.