Archived: Fitzrovia Medical Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

We looked for evidence that the service involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

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

This service scored 60 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

During our interviews, staff emphasised they aimed to provide transparent information to patients and check decisions directly with them, so patients made informed choices about care and treatment. We were only able to review limited feedback gathered by the service. This feedback described staff as caring, understanding, kind and professional. Patients also reported feeling comfortable discussing their concerns and that staff listened attentively.

The service did not always treat people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.

Staff explained how longer appointments could be arranged where required and described escalating requests for interpreters or additional support to senior leaders or clinicians. Patient feedback indicated how the clinic was responsive and described how staff helped arrange appointments at short notice including same-day appointments where needed.

Staff described how reasonable adjustments or specific needs were discussed verbally when registering patients who may need extra support around mental health and patients with sensory impairments. However, we did not see evidence that this was recorded during registration and within clinical records. We were not assured that leaders demonstrated a responsibility to a committed culture of equality.

The service promoted people’s choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

The limited patient feedback we reviewed described staff taking time to explain diagnoses and treatment options. Patients said they felt listened to and supported during consultations. Feedback also described staff helping patients to access appointments at short notice where required.

The service did not always have effective systems to respond to people’s immediate needs. The service did not always make sure people were directed to the most appropriate care and treatment without delay.

An emergency call button was available in the consulting room for assistance from the wider hospital where required. The provider told us the clinic did not manage emergency appointments. We did not see evidence of specific care navigation training completed by the non-clinical staff members who were involved in triage. Staff we spoke with were not always able to clearly describe the process for responding to urgent concerns or referring people to appropriate emergency services, including mental health crisis teams. During interviews, staff were also unable to demonstrate an understanding of sepsis recognition and appropriate escalation procedures. Staff told us they would usually contact the lead GP or wider hospital for further advice.

The service cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care.

Staff told us they were valued by leaders and leaders had taken steps to recognise and meet the wellbeing needs of staff, which included adjustments to working arrangements. Staff reported being supported if they were struggling in their roles.