Expert Health Limited

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

We looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs, and that staff treated people equally and without discrimination.

At our last assessment, we rated this key question as good. At this assessment, the rating has remained 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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Our review of clinical records showed patients were supported to understand their condition and were involved in planning for their care needs. They were also involved in decisions about their care. Fees for treatments were displayed and agreed by patients beforehand.

Staff and leaders at the service told us that they understood the needs of its patients and tailored services in response to those needs. The service used internal data gathered from the system to better understand the patient population and evidence showed this was used to inform quality improvement priorities. For example, 80% of orders were placed between 8am and 11pm, peak demand was Monday mornings and lowest on Saturdays. This aligned with the digital accessibility of the service with frequent use during waking hours.

There were established mechanisms for engaging with the local community healthcare provider. The service worked in partnership with the Chelsea and Westminster NHS trust to help meet the needs of the patient population and this was reflected in meeting minutes we saw. They also detailed processes by which care information was shared with patients’ own GPs. This demonstrated that continuity of care is actively managed across multiple interfaces, reducing the risk of fragmented care and supported safe, coordinated and responsive care for patients.

The service had processes in place to both ensure that staff had the training and guidance that they needed to provide good care, and to ensure that this was monitored with shared learning. Staff and leaders who we spoke to told us that they would provide patients with information about their condition. Patients are provided with information that is relevant to their condition before, during and after consultations. The service website also provided additional educational information to patients including video content to help educate patients further. Where patient's needs could not be met by the service, staff redirected them to the appropriate service for their needs.

The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff were aware that they would need to involve patients in decisions relating to their care and told them what had changed as a result and we saw evidence of this.

Leaders told us that patient satisfaction was fundamental to the development of the service, and they provided examples of how feedback had fed into service development. Feedback was used to improve communication, staff training and patient-centred care. We saw complaints were managed in line with the service’s policy. Learning from complaints was evident and staff were able to identify changes made as a result of patient feedback.

Leaders at the service told us that they wanted to ensure that all patients to whom their service was being offered could access it. This included support with IT based systems and processes used by the service. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. People could access the service using the online webform 24/7. Secure messages from patients were reviewed by clinicians during the operating hours (9am-5pm Monday to Friday and 9am-1pm Saturdays). The service ensured people received post care advice and information that covered medication administration, side effects, red flags and safety-netting information. Unverified data gathered from the service showed the online model reduced access barriers for underserved groups including those from black ethnic backgrounds and those living in areas of deprivation.

The service redesigned the body mass index (BMI) video acceptance process, and this showed improvements to this process from 60% to over 80% within 12 weeks. This reduced delays, repeat submissions and administrative burden, supporting more timely and accessible progression through the assessment pathway.

Staff treated people equally and without discrimination. The senior management team looked at barriers to care, support and treatment, and were very aware that online services were not suitable for all clients. Collaborative working and targeted interventions, including digital messaging and proactive telephone follow-up allowed for equitable access for ethnic groups and higher need populations. Staff used appropriate systems to capture and review feedback from people using the service.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their care. Our records review showed people were supported to consider their wishes for treatments. This information was shared with other services when necessary. The service had a clinical audit road map for the year ahead with the focus on different aspects every month.

The provider had a Men’s health educational event with Prostate Cancer UK for GPs and pharmacists, whereby the benefits of digital healthcare for men’s health were explored. Feedback following the event found 99% of clinicians were more comfortable advocating for online services for men’s health, compared to 19% before the event.