You are here

DDRC Medical Services Limited

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Updated 29 June 2017

We found the following areas of good practice:

  • High standards of cleanliness and hygiene were maintained throughout the environment.
  • Patient records were comprehensive, had evidence of patient involvement and treatment plans were written from their perspective on how to meet their needs.
  • Staff were encouraged to participate in research projects and to have them or articles they had been involved in published in professional peer journals. We were shown several of these.
  • The staff had the right qualifications, skills, knowledge and experience to do their job and meet patients’ needs.
  • Patients were routinely involved in planning and making decisions about their treatment. Patients told us they were actively involved in their treatment plans and staff listened to how their wound affected their daily lives.
  • Patients had timely access to initial assessment, diagnosis, treatment and they could book into a clinic, which best suited their needs.
  • There were effective governance systems in place to ensure quality and performance was managed.
  • Feedback was actively sought from patients and staff and used to improve the service they offered.

However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

  • The provider’s safeguarding policy did not include information about Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

  • The provider’s complaints procedure made incorrect references to CQC’s involvement in complaints handling.
Inspection areas

Safe

Updated 29 June 2017

  • There was a process in place for reporting incidents and staff knew how to report concerns.

  • Staff were up-to-date with safeguarding training for both adults and children. This was in line with relevant recommendations.

  • The premises were very clean and tidy, with effective infection prevention and control measures in place.

  • Staff were trained in safety systems, processes and practices and up were up-to-date with mandatory training.

  • Patient records were comprehensive with detailed treatment plans on their wound management.

However:

The provider’s safeguarding policy did not include information about Female Genital Mutilation (FGM).

Effective

Updated 29 June 2017

  • The service provided evidence-based care and treatment, following national recognised guidance.

  • Staff told us they were trained to efficiently undertake clinical trials to recognised standards.

  • Staff were encouraged to participate in research and to have their research or articles published in professional peer journals.

  • The staff had the right qualifications, skills, knowledge and experience to do their job and meet patients' needs. 

Caring

Updated 29 June 2017

  • Feedback from patients was positive. Staff were described as professional and caring.

  • Staff maintained patients’ privacy and dignity at all times.

  • Patients were actively involved in their treatment choices and provided with information in a way they could understand.

Responsive

Updated 29 June 2017

  • Patients were able to choose clinic times which suited their needs. There was access to free parking.

  • Staff had access to a telephone interpreter service to meet the needs of patients whose first language was not English.

  • A system was in place to handle patients’ complaints professionally and confidentially.

    However:

  • The provider’s complaints procedure made incorrect references to CQC being involved in complaints handling.

Well-led

Updated 29 June 2017

  • There was a great commitment towards continual improvement and innovation.

  • The service was very responsive to feedback from patients, staff and external agencies.

  • There were effective governance systems in place to ensure quality and performance were managed. There were effective communication channels between senior management and clinical staff.

  • There was effective leadership; staff spoke positively about leaders, both at local and an organisational level.