You are here

Archived: Centre of Integrated Medicine

Reports


Inspection carried out on 3, 8 January 2014

During a routine inspection

Two visits were made as there was no consultation service provided on the first day of the inspection. The second visit was made to talk with people using the service, check records and meet the manager. All the people we spoke with were positive about the service. One person said, “it’s really nice, friendly and caring”. A second person described the service as, “excellent, I can’t speak highly enough.” People told us they liked the holistic approach taken and that the manager was professional and took time to listen. One person said, “they deal with the whole person, the doctor has a very good approach.”

People told us that they were involved in their treatment and provided with information. One person said, “I get lots of information and they make sure I understand.” A second person said, “they show me the records and I also get a copy if any tests are done.”

Treatment plans were detailed and provided evidence that people’s needs had been assessed. We saw that there were plans in place to meet people’s needs. Records were kept online on the provider’s dedicated computer software system which meant they were easy to access and set out in clear sections for appointments, tests and follow up.

The premises, including the treatment room, were clean. None of the people we spoke with had concerns about cleanliness. We saw that there were protective gloves and clothing available, that there were suitable arrangements for disposal of clinical waste and that staff had been provided with information and training about health and safety and infection control.

There was a small staff team which worked together effectively. Although appointments were only available two days a week the receptionist / secretary worked full time and was able to make appointments, provide information and respond to arising matters on the other days. Staff had received a range of relevant training including safeguarding and there had been team training sessions in areas relevant to the service such as health and safety. There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. For example, clinical audits which included action plans where it was identified that improvements or adjustments were needed.

Inspection carried out on 24 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We were unable to speak to any patients who use the service, as there were no appointments on the day of our visit. We were however, able to observe how patients were spoken to during telephone enquiries. The staff member was respectful, calm, informative and friendly.

Patients who use the service were given sufficient information and were involved in making decisions about their care. A medical history and a lifestyle history were taken for each patient. We were told by the doctor that “the nature of what they do is individualised as that is what integrated care is all about, the whole person.” The doctor also told us that patients were given time at their appointment to ensure they understood the care and treatment they required.

We observed that the computer system had an alert system. This was to ensure that any patient who had mobility or sensory needs, had the right level of support provided for them at their appointment. We observed that there was an effective quality assurance system in place.