Knapton House

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 the provider involved people in decisions about their treatments and provided them advice and support.

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.

Feedback from people using the service was positive. People told us they felt involved in the assessment of their needs and treatment they had been provided attended by the service. People were confident the provider understood their individual needs.

The provider planned and delivered people’s treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current clinical evidence-based good practice and standards.

Systems were in place to ensure the provider was up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. The records we saw demonstrated treatment was provided in line with current guidance.

The service provider understood when it was necessary to work with other local healthcare providers including GP practices to ensure people had holistic treatment continuity.

The service provider worked collaboratively with other healthcare services to support continuity of care, including when clinical responsibilities were delegated to external providers.

The service provider supported people with choice and control by giving them comprehensive information with the risks and benefits about treatments.

People’s feedback we reviewed was positive regarding the outcomes from the treatment they had received.

The service provider routinely monitored peoples’ treatment and satisfaction to ensure their outcomes were positive.

People were advised about possible expected and unexpected side-effects following treatment and received appropriate follow-up when needed.

For the regulated activities delivered, the staff asked people to sign consent forms to indicate they understood the treatment fees and any risks involved. The staff told people about their rights around consent and respected them when delivering their treatments.

Attendance at the clinic was initiated by people that sought the treatments provided at the service. People who expressed an interest in taking up treatment were given comprehensive information about the services available. They were given as much time as they needed to reach a decision on whether to progress with a particular treatment without any pressure to proceed.

Staff had received training on consent and the Mental Capacity Act and demonstrated a good understanding of their responsibilities. Where required, advocates were involved to help people participate in decisions about their care and treatment.