The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Trinity Medical Imaging

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

T M I House, 29 Waverley Way, Carshalton, Surrey, SM5 3LQ (020) 3137 2155

Provided and run by:
Trinity Medical Imaging Ltd

All Inspections

During an assessment of Diagnostic imaging

We inspected Trinity Medical Imaging using our comprehensive inspection methodology and carried out the unannounced inspection on 17 March 2026. This assessment was carried out because of the service’s aged rating.

TMI received the majority of its referrals from NHS providers in the UK. Most patients were seen through the routine NHS pathway, with a smaller proportion of privately funded, urgent NHS, and cancer pathway referrals.

The provider had a total of 2 sites, TMI house specialising in nuclear medicine scanning, including SPECT, DAT scans and MUGA scans.The new sister site that we did not inspect, but were told had taken over the performance of ultrasound scanning. We inspected the main site, based in TMI house. This focused on the treatment of adult patients but the service also accepted paediatric patients, over 5 years of age. Between January 2025 to December 2025, the service provided diagnostic imaging for a total of 4158 patients. This was divided into the following age categories. For patients under 18 years of age, 108 patients were scanned. For adult patients between 18 and 70 years, 2978 patients were scanned. For patients over 70 years, there were 1072 patient scans performed. From January 2025 to December 2025 the majority of TMI’s patients were aged between 61-70 years old.

Across all age ranges TMI carried out a total of 3254 Nuclear medical scans, 2 Dexa scans and 902 ultrasound scans. We were unable to assess the ultrasound facilities during this assessment, as ultrasound scanning facilities were no longer at this site.

However, we were told within the ‘last few months’ that ultrasound scans had been taken over by their sister site.

We rated the service as Requires Improvement. We found 1 breach of the regulation in relation to governance. Governance systems and audits were not effective in identifying or addressing areas of risk.

However, staff were caring and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

We have requested an action plan, this will be requested upon publication of the final report.

During an assessment of the hospital overall

We inspected Trinity Medical Imaging (TMI) using our comprehensive inspection methodology and carried out the unannounced inspection on 17 March 2026. This assessment was carried out because of the service’s aged rating.

TMI received the majority of its referrals from NHS providers in the UK. Most patients were seen through the routine NHS pathway, with a smaller proportion of privately funded, urgent NHS, and cancer pathway referrals.

The provider had a total of 2 sites, TMI house specialising in nuclear medicine scanning, including SPECT, DAT scans and MUGA scans. The new sister site was not inspected, but were told it had taken over the performance of ultrasound scanning. We inspected the main site, based in TMI house. This focused on the treatment of adult patients but the service also accepted paediatric patients, over 5 years of age. Between January 2025 to December 2025, the service provided diagnostic imaging for a total of 4158 patients. This was divided into the following age categories. For patients under 18 years of age, 108 patients were scanned. For adult patients between 18 and 70 years, 2978 patients were scanned. For patients over 70 years, there were 1072 patient scans performed. From January 2025 to December 2025 the majority of TMI’s patients were aged between 61-70 years old.

Across all age ranges TMI carried out a total of 3254 Nuclear medical scans, 2 Dexa scans and 902 ultrasound scans. We were unable to assess the ultrasound facilities during this assessment, as ultrasound scanning facilities were no longer at this site. However, we were told within the ‘last few months’ that ultrasound scans had been taken over by the service's sister site.

We rated the service as Requires Improvement. We found 1 breach of the regulation in relation to governance. Governance systems and audits were not effective in identifying or addressing areas of risk and improvement.

However, staff were caring and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

We have requested an action plan, this will be requested upon publication of the final report.

5 November 2018

During a routine inspection

Trinity Medical Imaging is operated by Trinity Medical Imaging Ltd. It is an independent nuclear medicine service. The service was registered with the CQC in 2017 and provides nuclear medicine services to children, young people and adults.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the inspection unannounced on 5 November 2018.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Services we rate

We rated it as Good overall.

Our key findings were as follows:

  • Patients received care in a clean and suitably maintained environment. Staff were aware of and applied infection prevention and control guidelines.
  • Staff had the right qualifications, skills, knowledge and experience to undertake their roles and responsibilities. They had access to training and were supported by service leaders. All the staff were up to date with their mandatory training and had received an appraisal in the last 12 months.
  • Patients had timely access to appointments. There was some flexibility in appointment times to meet the needs of patients who were working or had other responsibilities.
  • There were processes to ensure safety checks and maintenance of equipment was completed in line with manufacturers’ guidelines.
  • We observed staff taking time to interact with people who used the service in a respectful and considerate manner.
  • Risk assessments were undertaken through the relevant channels.
  • Each procedure undertaken had a specific pathway, and these were displayed for staff to follow.
  • Staff told us they felt well supported by their colleagues and leaders of the service.
  • Records were stored to maintain patient confidentiality at all times. Imaging reports were legible and contained relevant information.
  • The service sought the views of staff, patients and stakeholders to drive improvement within the service.
  • Policies and procedures were reviewed yearly and there was clear oversight in relation to the management and development of policies and procedures.

Dr Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (London)