• Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Private Medical Clinic

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

88 Hagley Road, Birmingham, West Midlands, B16 8LU (020) 8050 0379

Provided and run by:
Khela Medical Limited

Important:

We served a s39 Warning Notice on Khela Medical Limited on 25 August 2026 for failing to meet the regulations relating to good governance at Private Medical Clinic.

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 2 July 2026 to 31 July 2026.
Private Medical Clinic provided by Khela Medical Ltd is an independent health service which registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in January 2024 to provide the following regulated activities to the whole population:
• Diagnostic and Screening procedures
• Treatment of disease, disorder or injury
Private Medical Clinic provides private GP services alongside a range of other medical services including travel services such as vaccinations and visa medicals, health screening including cancer screening, sexual health testing, infertility screening, mental health assessment and treatment, memory and dementia assessment and treatment, occupational health services, women’s health services and weight management treatment. This service also provides aesthetic services, some of which are not regulated by CQC. This report only refers to those services which are regulated by CQC. The service has assessed and/or treated approximately 6,000 patients since its registration.
The service is based at a fully converted clinic building in central Birmingham which the provider leases. This building is shared with a tenant of the provider and includes clinic rooms, a minor surgical theatre, recovery room and rooms used for non-regulated treatments. At the time of this inspection the provider did not use the operating theatre and recovery room as they did not currently provide surgical services. However, the provider had applied to CQC to add the regulated activity of surgical procedures which would be provided from these rooms, so they were included in this inspection. The provider has satellite locations in Sutton Coldfield, Leicester, Derby, Oxford, London, Newcastle and Bournemouth. The provider leases rooms within other clinics at each of these locations which are managed through specific service level agreements with each landlord. The service employs GPs, junior doctors, consultant specialists, nurses and physician associates and treats patients of all ages including children. Services are provided face-to-face and virtually at all locations as not all staff at each location can provide all of the listed services, for example, a consultant older-age psychiatrist based in London provides memory and dementia assessments virtually to all satellite clinics. Staff travelled between satellite clinics if this was required. The medical director visited every clinic in-person monthly. Each satellite clinic had a named site lead who was responsible for the day-to-day management of that location. All locations operated under the same management and governance structure and used the same IT and clinical records systems. All services were offered on a pre-booked appointment basis. Patients could access their local clinic to book an appointment in person, by telephone or via the website. Appointments were offered between 8am and 7pm Monday to Friday and 9am to 1pm on Saturdays at all locations.
This was the first inspection of this service since registration with CQC in 2024. We carried out a comprehensive inspection reviewing all quality statements under the five key questions of safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.
We carried out site visits at the Birmingham, Sutton Coldfield, Derby and Leicester clinics. Due to the complexity of the service, our inspection team comprised a GP specialist advisor who reviewed clinical records in person at the main Birmingham location, a psychiatrist specialist advisor who reviewed clinical records remotely, a CQC medicines optimisation team inspector who reviewed clinical records remotely, an inspector who visited one site and the lead inspector who conducted the other site visits and remote interviews with staff.
The service had a good learning culture and people could raise concerns. Managers investigated incidents thoroughly. Staff mostly had the right skills, qualifications and experience. We found some knowledge gaps which contributed to errors or omissions in the governance of some of the premises, the administration of medicines by non-medical staff and the safe management of medicines requiring refrigeration. People were mostly protected and kept safe however the issues which we identified above had put patients at risk of harm.
People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff reviewed assessments taking account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was mostly based on latest evidence and good practice. Staff worked with NHS services where possible, with the consent of the patient for the best outcomes and smooth transitions when moving services. Staff made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent, however this was not consistently documented.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.
People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and people received fair and equal care and treatment.
Leaders and staff had a shared vision and culture based on listening, learning and trust. Leaders were visible and knowledgeable. Staff felt supported to give feedback and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment. Staff mostly understood their roles and responsibilities although we identified some gaps in knowledge and skills. There was a culture of continuous improvement however, this was responsive rather than proactive in nature and the management team lacked the capacity and experience to ensure that comprehensive governance oversight was maintained.
We found 2 breaches of the regulations in relation to Regulation 12: safe care and treatment and Regulation 17: good governance. We have asked the practice for an action plan in response to the regulation 12 safe care and treatment concerns found at this assessment.