FKS Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback. The service took feedback seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. People were involved in planning their care and understood options around choosing to withdraw or not receive care.

This service scored 43 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. There is no previous rating for the Responsive key question so we cannot yet publish a score for this area.

The two step consultation period allowed the staff to plan for the individual needs of the patient. Staff asked what the patient’s desired outcome was and discussed the outcome of treatment. Where the desired outcome was not achievable patients were advised of what treatment could achieve. We were told that at times when patients attended the clinic the treatments needs were more than that which was planned. In cases such as this the plan of care was discussed with the patient to ensure that they understood the outcome of treatment.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Whilst the service was open to provide care and support during working week hours. Patients were given a telephone number where they could get “out of hours” support and care should they need it. The staff monitoring the text chat were able to access a member of the medical team should they need further advice. When the medical staff thought that someone required further investigations prior to a hair transplant they were referred to their own GP with a letter.

Staff and leaders had given thought to patients who may need a higher level of support to use the services. They had a criterion for admission which would include adaptations as required. We were told by the senior team that the service could access interpreters if their services were required. However, staff working in the clinic appeared unaware of this facility and would use online translations services. Staff within the clinic spoke a number of languages which made communication with patients easier.

The medical team discussed the after care of the transplant with the patient. They also ensured that the patient was told, and it was reiterated that the transplant may take up to 18 months to fully develop into a hairline. At the consultations future treatment and options were discussed with patients as most receding hairlines continue to recede despite treatment.