Tajmeel clinic ltd

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

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good.

Good: This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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.

Description: We make sure people are at the centre of their care and treatment choices and we decide, in partnership with them, how to respond to any relevant changes in their needs.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment.

The service planned and organised services, so they met the needs of patients. Consultations were by appointment only and meant patients could see the surgeon at a time to suit them.

The provider gave examples of discussions held with patients about potential treatment options. This included example of where the provider had rectified previous treatment concerns, from other providers, that had been causing patient’s distress. We were told how this had positively impacted on the patient's mental state and well-being. Feedback from patients confirmed the approach taken by the provider.

Description: We understand the diverse health and care needs of people and our local communities, so care is joined-up, flexible and supports choice and continuity.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Initial consultations were given free to enable potential patients to discuss their options. The surgeon stated it was important to enable conversations about offers available and to ensure expectations were realistic to meet patients’ needs. The service had one surgeon who carried out both the consultations and procedures. This provided continuity for the patients throughout their treatment journey.

Description: We provide appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that we tailor to individual needs.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The registered manager understood their responsibilities of when to notify the local authority and CQC of notifiable incidents, such as safeguarding concerns. The service did not submit any data externally nor had a reason to submit any notifications externally in the 12 months before our inspection.

Staff did not routinely share details of the treatment with other healthcare providers, as this was a cosmetic procedure and many patients did not want this information shared.

The surgeon collected patient care episode information in line with requirements. This data was used by the surgeon in his professional appraisals to demonstrate the treatments and outcomes of the surgical procedures.

Description: We make it easy for people to share feedback and ideas or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support.

The service had no complaints in 12 months before our inspection. The service’s website offered an opportunity to provide feedback or send a message. Complaints would be directed to the registered manager of the service, who would investigate them. The service clearly displayed information about how to raise a concern in the patient waiting area.

Staff understood the policy on complaints and knew how to handle them. The policy set out timeframes for timely investigation and responses to be shared with patients who made a complaint.

It was easy for people to give feedback and raise concerns about care received. The service’s website offered an opportunity for patients to provide feedback or contact the clinic. The service treated concerns and complaints seriously. Staff met to discuss the feedback and look at improvements to patient care.

The service aimed to consider all patient feedback and take appropriate actions in response when feasible and beneficial.

Description: We make sure that everyone can access the care, support and treatment they need when they need it.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Patients could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait long for an appointment. All procedures were elective, and patients were able to choose a time that suited their preferred dates. Initial consultations were offered in person or via video call.

The service arranged for follow up appointments after hair transplant procedures. The surgeon used a procedure logbook to keep track of when patients were due for follow up appointments. If patients did not turn up for their follow up appointment, the surgeon would contact them.

Follow up appointments were generally carried out by telephone with photos shared by the patient to support the review and evaluate the outcome. Patients were also welcomed to attend face-to-face follow up appointments if they preferred this option.

The service kept the number of cancelled treatments to a minimum. Treatment dates were booked to fit with patient’s own availability. When patients had their treatments cancelled at the last minute, for example if the patient was unwell, the surgeon made sure they were rearranged as soon as possible and within national targets and guidance.

The clinic was located on the ground floor and accessible for people who had a physical disability. All toilets were equipped with handrails and doors were accessible to patients in wheelchairs.

Description: We listen to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. We tailor the care, support and treatment in response to this.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. Staff and leaders listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff could give examples of how to protect patients from harassment and discrimination, including those with protected characteristics under the Equality Act. For example, the service offered treatment to patients from the transgender community.

Description: We support people to plan for important life changes, so they can have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

Quality Statement Score:

We scored the service as 3. The evidence showed a good standard. People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future.

Staff used the consultation and consent process with patients to inform them of their options care and treatment. Once patients had all the information required to make an informed decision, they had time to reflect on their decision and were given a cooling off period that reflected national guidance. National guidance stated patients should be given consent in a two-stage process with a cooling off period of at least 14 days between stages.