Archived: Cranley Clinic

People were given sufficient information to enable them to consent to the care and support they required. People could decline such care if they so wished and this was respected by staff.

We looked at the patient survey results and the comments register and people who used the service indicated they had been well informed by staff and clinicians. We also observed that people that used the service knew what to expect and were supported after their treatment was complete. Most people who had fed back on their experience were satisfied with the care they received and indicated they were consulted and listened to at each stage of their care.

We saw the provider acknowledged and responded to complaints. We saw that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that peoples safety and their welfare was supported.

Standards of cleanliness were maintained and procedures were in place to minimise the risk of infections arising.

People who had used the service described it as "very good" and 'excellent'. Appropriate medical checks were undertaken before people received treatment. We looked at feedback questionnaires that had been completed in the last twelve months. Overall, people were happy with the care and treatment received.

People who use the service were given sufficient information and were involved in making decisions about their care. People had described Dr. Lowe as 'very professional". There were procedures in place to deal with emergencies.

There was a safeguarding policy in place for protecting vulnerable adults and child protection, staff were able to describe what action they would take.

Staff received adequate training and supervision. We were told that there was a procedure in place for them to undergo annual appraisals where their performance would be discussed and targets set for the coming year.

The service conducted audits to monitor the quality of the service it was providing. Regular patient feedback questionnaires were completed.