• Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Sarah Cannon Research UK

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

93 Harley Street, London, W1G 6AD (020) 3219 5200

Provided and run by:
Sarah Cannon Research Institute UK Limited

All Inspections

22 November 2022 & 1 December 2022

During a routine inspection

We rated this service for the first time. We rated it as good because:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service-controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.


  • The design and use of facilities of one treatment room made it feel cluttered and cramped when fully occupied by staff, patients and visitors.

1 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with two people who were participating in clinical trials. They told us that they had received sufficient information to give their consent to the trial and understood about the limits of a clinical trial. One person said they were 'extremely well looked after' and could find no 'significant faults' with the whole process to date.

People were assessed and screened prior to commencing a trial and this included tests and consultation about suitability. They saw a doctor at every visit to the centre and their progress and response to the trial was monitored.

There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk of infection. The centre was clean and well maintained and staff had received infection control training.

People were made aware of how to complain about any aspect of the service, however there had been no complaints in the last 12 months. People said that they would tell staff if they had a concern and had always received prompt responses.

There were detailed systems for reviewing the quality and safety of each clinical trial and these included quality assurance reviews, audit and inspection by the trial sponsors.

In this report the name of a registered manager appears who was not in post and not managing the regulatory activities at this location at the time of the inspection. Their name appears because they were still a registered manager on our register at the time.

11 April 2012

During a routine inspection

The people we spoke with were positive about their experiences at Sarah Cannon Research UK. They said they were treated as individuals and had enough information to make a decision about whether to participate in a clinical trial. They understood what being a participant in a clinical trial could potentially offer them, the risks and possible benefits. People using this service were positive about staff at this location and said that they could always ask for more information and would raise a concern if they had one.