You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 27 June 2019

We rated this service as Good overall. (The previous inspection on 18 December 2017 rated the service as being compliant.)

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Good

Are services effective? – Good

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Good

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Pharmacy2U Limited on 8 May 2019 as part of our inspection programme. We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions, to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with that Act.

Pharmacy2U Limited provides an online doctor consultation, treatment and prescribing service relating to a range of medical conditions. Details of the service provided can be found on their website

The provider is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some general exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of service and these are set out in Schedule 2 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Pharmacy2U Limited also provide pharmacy and NHS Prescription services, which are not regulated by CQC and do not fall into the scope of this inspection. These services, are regulated by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC).

One of the doctors acts in the capacity of the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements relating to the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

During the inspection, we reviewed a range of systems and processes relating to governance, service delivery and patient care.

Our key findings were:

  • There was a comprehensive range of systems, processes and a clear leadership structure, to manage governance and service delivery.
  • The provider had undertaken a range of risk assessments to improve patient safety. For example, risk assessing the conditions treated and medicines offered to patients.
  • Doctors prescribed and delivered care in a safe and effective way, supported by protocols and pathways based on national guidance.
  • Patients had access to information to support their decision making regarding their care and treatment.
  • There was a comprehensive recruitment process and staff were supported to participate in training appropriate for their role and to support competency.
  • Feedback from patients and staff was encouraged and used to support improvements in service delivery.
  • The service was easily accessible 24 hours per day, seven days per week via the provider’s website.
  • Staff said they were happy to work for the provider and felt very supported by managers and leaders.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Improve the arrangements for clinical audit, including the review of consultations, to support quality improvement.
  • Consider recording all incidents, not just significant events, to increase the opportunities for learning to occur.

Dr Rosie Benneyworth BM BS BMedSci MRCGP

Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services and Integrated Care

Inspection areas



Updated 27 June 2019



Updated 27 June 2019



Updated 27 June 2019



Updated 27 June 2019



Updated 27 June 2019