• Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Archived: 4 Upper Wimpole Street

4 Upper Wimpole Street, Marylebone, London, W1G 6LF (020) 7224 2630

Provided and run by:
The London Vein Institute

All Inspections

29 May 2013

During a routine inspection

It was not possible to speak to people who used the service there were no appointments booked on the day of our inspection. However, we looked at feedback questionnaire's that had been completed between January and April 2013 and the provider's 2012 feedback survey results. These indicated that people were satisfied with the care and treatment they had received. One person had described their doctor as "highly skilled and professional". People were encouraged to leave feedback and all negative comments were logged. There was a complaints policy and procedure in place. We saw that all verbal and written complaints were responded to and resolved to the person's satisfaction.

People received care that ensured their safety and welfare by staff that had received appropriate professional development. They were always assessed and treated by a doctor and were required to provide written consent before treatment was carried out. If a person required a surgical procedure this took place at a private hospital in London. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

According to the feedback questionnaires, people who use the service were complimentary about the doctors and were confident in their ability. The doctors were appraised by another medical professional who was independent to the clinic. At the time of the inspection they were in the process of having their professional qualifications revalidated.

7 September 2011

During a routine inspection

People who use services were very positive about the service provided to them, they are fully involved in the treatment and all areas of risk and choices available to them were discussed at the consultation. They told us that they had been provided with information that included the safeguarding and chaperoning procedures.

We spent time in the waiting area and staff were seen to liaise with all patients in a respectful and dignified manner. Evidence from our inspection and quality assurance audit records from October 2010- April 2011 showed that the patients that had used the service were happy with the treatment received and the after care and support provided.