10 Harley Street

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as Good. At this assessment, the rating remains the same.
 

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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

People felt supported to raise concerns and felt staff treated them with compassion and understanding.
 

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. All patients were registered to 1 GP. If the patient was unable to wait to see the GP or the GP was not available, patients were guided back to their usual NHS GP. Records of private consultations were sent to patients.

The service worked alongside NHS GPs but did not handle end to end patient care. There was continuity of care for individual isolated matters, but once a patient’s treatment and care was complete, they were then referred back to their NHS GP.
 

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The service shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

The service provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. Emergency equipment was available and well maintained.

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. Contracts were in place to ensure the premises were maintained. Health and safety risk assessments and audits had been undertaken and risks identified had been addressed.

The service consisted of 1 GP and 1 receptionist. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly. Cleaning schedules were in place and followed.

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. The service rarely prescribed high risk medicines, and if they did it would only be in emergency cases and for a short course. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened. As part of our assessment we reviewed 5 patient records, and all records were adequate and well documented. The service had a system for paper and digital prescribing. The service kept prescriptions secure in a locked cupboard, or in a locked briefcase when out for home visits.