• Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Oryon Imaging and Healthcare Ltd

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lister House, 11-12 Wimpole Street, London, W1G 9ST (020) 7042 1888

Provided and run by:
Oryon Imaging and Healthcare Ltd

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Oryon Imaging and Healthcare Ltd on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Oryon Imaging and Healthcare Ltd, you can give feedback on this service.

17 December 2019

During a routine inspection

Oryon Imaging and Healthcare Ltd is operated by Oryon Imaging and Healthcare Ltd. Facilities include one MRI scanner, one x-ray machine, one dexa scanner, one ultrasound consulting rooms and one spare consulting room.

The service only provided diagnostic imaging and we inspected the service using our diagnostic imaging core service framework. We carried out an unannounced inspection on 17 December 2019.

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.

We rated the service as Good overall.

We found good practice in relation to diagnostic imaging care:

  • The service had enough staff with the right qualifications, skills, training and experience to keep people safe from avoidable harm and to provide the right care and treatment.
  • The service controlled infection risk well. Staff used equipment and control measures to protect patients, themselves and others from infection. They kept equipment and the premises visibly clean.
  • The design, maintenance and use of facilities, premises and equipment kept people safe. Staff were trained to use equipment competently. Staff managed clinical waste well.
  • Staff identified and quickly acted upon patients at risk of deterioration.
  • Staff kept detailed records of patients’ care and treatment. Records were clear, up to date, stored securely and easily available to all staff providing care.
  • The service provided care and treatment based on evidence-based practice.
  • Staff ensured that patients remained comfortable during their examination.
  • The service made sure staff were competent for their roles. Managers appraised staff’s work performance and held supervision meetings with them to provide support and development.
  • Healthcare professionals worked together as a team to benefit patients. They supported each other to provide good care.
  • Key services were available seven days a week to support timely patient care and meets the demands of patients.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and took account of their individual needs.
  • Staff provided emotional support to patients to minimise their distress.
  • Staff supported and involved patients, families and carers to understand their condition and make decisions about their care and treatment.
  • The service planned and provided care in a way that met the needs of patients.
  • The service was inclusive and took account of patients’ individual needs and preferences. Staff made reasonable adjustments to help patients access services.
  • People could access the service when they needed it and received the right care promptly.
  • It was easy for people to give feedback and raise concerns about care received. The service treated concerns and complaints seriously, investigated them and shared lessons learned with all staff.
  • Managers had the integrity, skills and abilities to run the service. They were visible and approachable in the service for patients and staff.
  • The service had a vision for what it wanted to achieve and a strategy to turn it into action.
  • Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. The service had an open culture where patients, their families and staff could raise concerns without fear.
  • Leaders and teams used systems to manage performance effectively. They identified and escalated relevant risks and issues and identified actions to reduce their impact. They had plans to cope with unexpected events.

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

  • Staff understood how to recognise abuse and had appropriate training However, at the time of the inspection clinical staff were not confident in explaining their safeguarding process.
  • The service did not keep complete fit and proper persons records for the company director.
  • There was variable knowledge of the values, vision and strategy amongst staff at the service.
  • Patients and staff did not have access to a translation service.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it must take some actions to comply with the regulations and that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. We also issued the provider with requirement notice(s). Details are at the end of the report.

Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals

24 January 2014

During a routine inspection

There was a consent policy and procedure in place. This featured details about mental capacity, when written consent was required and the need for people to be fully appraised of their treatment options and what they involved. All staff were trained in the use of this policy during their induction to the service. We reviewed the results of patient feedback questionnaires collected between June and November 2013. When asked whether procedures were explained in a way that people could understand the majority of respondents stated that this was done "completely".

When people attended the service they were asked relevant questions about their health to ensure that it was safe to undergo their designated imaging process. The person we spoke to using the service described it as "good". In the patient feedback survey the majority of people rated their overall satisfaction with the service as "excellent" and said that they would recommend it to others. Staff received annual training in what to do in a medical emergency.

On the day of the inspection the service was clean and tidy. There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

Appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work. There was an effective complaints system available.

11 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke to three people who had used the service and looked at written patient feedback submitted between June and August 2012. People described staff as "perfectly polite", "friendly" and "helpful". Written and verbal information about procedures was provided to people using the service.

Appropriate medical information was taken from patients prior to undergoing procedures to ensure that it was safe for them to do so. Checks were made on equipment and the building itself to ensure that it was safe for treatment to be provided. Staff had been trained in how to handle medical emergencies and there was emergency equipment and drugs on site. People told us that they were "happy" with the service and that "everything was ok".

People told us that they felt "safe" when using the service and that they did not have any concerns about staff. Staff had been trained in spotting signs of abuse, as well as how to escalate any concerns that they had.

Staff received an induction to the service and were required to attend appropriate mandatory training on a yearly basis. There were plans for their performance to be assessed on an annual basis. Clinical staff undertook further training to maintain their professional registration.

There were procedures in place for people to be able to provide feedback about the service and the quality of the treatment provided was regularly monitored.