The Harley Street Dermatology Clinic

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We looked for evidence that staff involved people in decisions about their care and treatment and provided them advice and support. Staff regularly reviewed people’s care and worked with other services to achieve this.

This is the first inspection for this service since its registration with CQC. This key question has been rated as Good.

This service scored 71 (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’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Feedback from people using the service was positive. People felt involved in any assessment of their needs and felt confident that staff understood their individual and cultural needs.

Clinical staff used consultation templates to ensure consistency and support the holistic review of individuals' health and wellbeing.

The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Systems were in place to ensure staff were up to date with evidence-based guidance and legislation. Clinical records we saw demonstrated care was provided in line with current guidance.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people.

Staff had access to the information they needed to appropriately assess, plan, and deliver people’s care, treatment, and support. The service worked with other services to ensure continuity of care.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Where appropriate, staff gave patients advice so they could self-care. Risk factors were identified, highlighted to patients and where appropriate highlighted to their normal care provider for additional support. For example, as routine, the provider advised patients on the harmful effects of excessive sunlight (ultraviolet UV) on skin and the links between this and skin cancers. Where patients’ needs could not be met by the service, staff redirected them to the appropriate service for their needs.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The service carried out regular quality monitoring activities, including audits. For example, the service carried out prescription audits, cold chain audits, surgical audits, hand hygiene audits, laser safety audits and medicine management audits.

However, these activities did not always demonstrate meaningful assurance or improvement in clinical effectiveness. For example, one clinical audit reviewed only three patient records, which was not proportionate to the size or activity of the service. This limited the reliability of the findings and reduced the audit’s ability to identify trends or areas requiring improvement.

The provider had also completed a ‘prescription audit’, but this focused only on whether prescription documentation was completed correctly. It did not review the clinical appropriateness of medicines prescribed or assess compliance with relevant clinical guidelines. This meant the audit did not provide assurance that prescribing practice was safe, evidence-based, or aligned with best practice.

From the clinical notes we reviewed, we found that people who used the service experienced positive outcomes as set out in legislation, standards, and evidence-based clinical guidance.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff understood and applied legislation relating to consent. Capacity and consent were clearly recorded.