Archived: Just Health

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 29 November 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Dr Sohail Ijarz Ansar is the registered provider at Just Health. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Just Health provides services such as DVLA medicals and cupping therapy which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we did not inspect or report on these services.

The element of the service offered by Just Health which does fall into the scope of our regulation is circumcision procedures for boys aged up to one year old.

Our key findings were:

• The service was offered on a private, fee-paying basis only and was accessible to those who chose to use it.
• Circumcision procedures were safely managed and there were effective levels of patient support and post-operative care.
• The provider was conscientious and ensured the needs of patients were met appropriately.
• There were systems in place to identify and learn from incidents and near misses. Learning was implemented appropriately following these.
• Information available to the parents of patients was comprehensive and accessible.
• Patient outcomes were monitored and analysed as part of quality improvement processes.
• Staff had the skills and qualifications to carry out their roles.
• The service shared relevant information with a patient’s own GP as appropriate and referred patients on to other services when necessary.
• The service encouraged feedback from patients’ parents. Feedback received was positive about the care and treatment offered.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

• Embed the newly updated consent form to record documents viewed to enable verification of parental responsibility appropriately.
• Review the process for recording batch numbers of anaesthetic medicine administered in patient records.
• Review the documentation of risk assessments to record the rationale for mitigating activities completed.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGPChief Inspector of General Practice