Optimum Road Health Centre

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

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

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.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and worked in partnership with them to respond to any changes in their needs. Clinicians took time to understand each person’s individual circumstances, preferences and goals, and used this information to guide discussions about treatment options across general private health care, ADHD assessments and minor surgery.

Care plans reflected the physical, mental, emotional and social needs of the people using the service, including needs associated with protected characteristics under the Equality Act. Our review of clinical records showed that people were supported to understand their condition and to take an active role in planning their care. Clinicians involved people in decisions about their treatment and adapted plans when their needs or circumstances changed.

Staff ensured that people and, where appropriate, parents or carers, had clear information to help them make informed choices. The approach taken by the service promoted personalised care that respected individuality and supported positive outcomes.

The service understood the diverse needs of the people who used it and provided care that was joined up, flexible and supportive of continuity. Staff worked with other organisations when people required additional support and ensured that referrals to external services were made appropriately. This helped people access the right care at the right time.

With the consent of the patient, NHS GPs were informed of any prescribing and any significant changes to their health needs. This supported safe continuity of care and helped ensure that all professionals involved remained aware of any developments in the person’s health.

The service maintained links with local healthcare providers and community services, which supported coordinated care pathways and ensured people could access suitable onward support when their needs changed.

The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up to date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People were given clear explanations about their care, treatment options and any follow-up required. Staff ensured that information was easy to understand and provided additional written material where needed.

Information was available in different formats to support accessibility, including large print and translated materials when required. The service had access to interpreter services, including British Sign Language, to support people who faced communication barriers. Information provided by the service met the Accessible Information Standard, and people were informed about how to access their care records.

These arrangements helped ensure that people had the information they needed to make informed decisions about their health and wellbeing.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Although the service had not received any complaints at the time of the inspection, there were clear processes in place for managing them, and people were signposted to information on how to make a complaint through the website, written materials and direct communication with staff.

Staff told us they understood the complaints procedure and were prepared to respond promptly and fairly if concerns were raised. The service encouraged people to share their views, and feedback was used to inform decision-making and improvements. People were involved in decisions about their care, and the service explained what had changed when feedback led to service development.

The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Appointments were available in a range of formats, including online, in person and by telephone, allowing people to choose the option that best suited their individual circumstances.

The provider reviewed feedback to identify improvements to access. Longer appointments were available for people who required additional time, such as those

with learning disabilities or more complex needs. Staff encouraged people to contact the service if they experienced difficulties arranging an appointment, and adjustments were made where possible.

All treatment rooms were located on the ground floor. The entrance had level access, and reception staff opened the door for people with mobility needs to ensure they could enter the building safely and comfortably.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who were most likely to experience inequality in their experience or outcomes, and they tailored care, support and treatment in response to this. Feedback was positive, and people told us they were treated equally and without discrimination.

Staff provided an inclusive approach to care, making adjustments where needed, such as offering longer appointments or additional communication support. The service considered the needs of people who might face barriers in understanding information, including those who did not speak English or had limited access to online resources.

Leaders reviewed feedback and used it to improve equity in people’s experiences within the context of a private service.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they had enough time to make informed decisions about their future. Clinicians discussed future care needs when appropriate and helped people understand their options, ensuring they felt prepared and informed.

Our review of records showed that people were supported to consider their preferences for their ongoing care, and this information was shared with other services when needed and with the person’s consent to support continuity and informed decision making.