The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Alliance Medical Harley Street

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

68 Harley Street, London, W1G 7HE (020) 7436 5755

Provided and run by:
European Scanning Centre (Harley Street) Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Alliance Medical Harley Street on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Alliance Medical Harley Street, you can give feedback on this service.

25 February 2022

During a routine inspection

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as good because:

  • The centre had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe.
  • The centre provided mandatory training in key skills to all staff.
  • Staff understood how to protect patients from abuse, were trained on how to recognise and report abuse, and they knew how to apply it.
  • The centre had suitable premises and equipment and looked after them well.
  • Staff completed and updated risk assessments for each patient and kept detailed records of patients’ care and treatment.
  • Staff provided kind and compassionate care to patients. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients. Staff supported patients to make decisions about their care.
  • Staff respected patients’ privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions.
  • Patients could access the service when they needed it and did not have long waits for diagnostic imaging procedures.
  • Managers promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on the company’s shared values. Staff felt respected, supported and valued and were focused on the needs of patients.

However,

  • The service did not manage patients’ medicines well. The medicines management policy did not detail adverse effects and double checking of glycerine trinitrate (GTN), or the procedures for the administration of patient specific drugs (PSD). The service did not have a system of regular medicines administration audits. PSD drug administration lists were not fully completed and clear about patients prescribed medicines.
  • Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) certificates were not always in accordance with the provider’s policy.
  • Some of the centre’s policies had not been reviewed in accordance with the published review date.
  • There was a lack of clarity on whether European Scanning Centre or Alliance Medical UK Limited (AML) were responsible for shared risks on the risk register.

15th and 28th January 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

European Scanning Centre (Harley Street) Ltd is operated by European Scanning Centre Ltd. European scanning centre (ESC) operates diagnostic imaging services across two other locations.

The service at Harley street consists of an Aquilion ONE 640 slice CT (computed tomography) scanner, a MRI Open upright and open MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) scanner, EOS dual source linear upright CT scanner (EOS imaging) and an Aplio 500 ultrasound scanner.

The service is split over three floors (basement, ground and first floor) within a building that has a shared entrance for residents residing on the third floor.

Patients are greeted by the receptionist and wait in a dedicated waiting room before being called through for their scan.

The service provides specialist diagnostic imaging services for adults, and children and young people.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the inspection on 15th January 2019, along with an unannounced visit to the service on 28th January 2019.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The main service provided by this provider was diagnostic imaging.

Services we rate

We rated this service as Requires improvement overall.

  • Although staff had training on how to report and recognise abuse, staff were not trained to an appropriate level in safeguarding.
  • Labels on sharps bins were not correctly completed.
  • Hazardous items were not always secured, and some areas were cluttered.
  • Patient specific directions (PSDs) and patient group directions (PGDs) were not used for administration of contrast media or medication.
  • The service had no robust systems for reporting incidents and it was not clear how learning from these, was shared or how practice was reviewed.
  • There was no medicines management policy in place.
  • The provider could not be assured staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
  • Arrangements for identifying, recording and managing risks were not robust.
  • There was no systematic programme of clinical audit to monitor quality or systems to identify where action should be taken.
  • There was a lack of effective governance processes to assess, monitor and review risks.
  • There were no meetings or formal measures of performance, except for financial performance.
  • Monthly staff meetings were not minuted and action logs were not recorded.

However, we also found the following areas of good practice:

  • MRI local safety rules were up to date and reflected best practice.
  • There were systems to demonstrate staff were competent to do their jobs and develop their skills.
  • There was good collaborative working to meet patients’ needs.
  • Patients were treated with dignity, respect and compassion.
  • Patients were given the opportunity to ask staff questions, and patients felt comfortable doing so.
  • Staff provided patients with emotional support; staff were sympathetic to anxious or distressed patients.
  • Same day appointments could be provided for patients.
  • Patients could access services easily. There were no waiting lists.
  • The service was planned and designed to meet the needs of the patients as it gave them access to timely scans.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.

Dr Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (London and South)

30 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with one person who had completed their test at the European Scanning Centre. They told us that they had received sufficient information to give their consent and understood about the test. They were happy with their care at the centre. We also saw the 2013 report of more than 100 people's feedback about the service. This showed an overall high level of satisfaction with the service.

People were assessed prior to their test to ensure it was suitable for them. There were arrangements to ensure that each test was undertaken in safe circumstances and followed medical protocols. Test results were returned to referring doctors or specialists promptly.

Imaging equipment was managed and risks assessed so that the centre was safe for staff and people using the service. New equipment was provided and supervised by specialists. Training was provided so that staff used equipment safely.

Medical records confirmed the detailed information and consent processes undertaken by the centre. Records were created, stored and managed securely.

22 November 2011

During a routine inspection

We were not able to speak to people at this location. People were there to have specialist imaging procedures and were involved with these on the day of our visit. We saw evidence from the last patient survey results, which are reviewed quarterly, that show that people using the service were generally very satisfied with the service offered at this location.