• Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Wimbledon NeuroCare

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

1 College Fields, 16 Prince George's Road, London, SW19 2PT (020) 3212 0830

Provided and run by:
Wimbledon NeuroCare Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Wimbledon NeuroCare 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 Wimbledon NeuroCare, you can give feedback on this service.

11 October 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall.

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

This service is rated as Good overall.

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection at Wimbledon NeuroCare on 11 October 2022 as part of our inspection programme.

Wimbledon NeuroCare is a private clinic that provides neurodiagnostic, hearing and balance tests and therapies from a variety of locations. The team comprises of a number of administrative office staff, consultants, audiology scientist, EEG technician, general manager and an operations manager.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 to provide the following regulated activities, diagnostic and screening procedures.

The operations manager is the CQC registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons. 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.

Our key findings were:

•The service had systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen.

•Risks to patients were always assessed and well managed, including those relating to safeguarding and recruitment checks.

•The clinic had policies and procedures to govern activity.

•The way the service was led and managed promoted the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

•The service proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

•The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

•Review the process of recording minor verbal complaints.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

Chief Inspector of Hospitals and Interim Chief Inspector of Primary Medical Services

3 December 2013

During a routine inspection

We were unable to speak with people during our inspection. This was because people that used the service attended their appointments with Consultants at one of four sites in London or the South East. We looked at other information to understand the experiences of people using the service. We saw from completed questionnaires, people were asked to rate and comment on their experiences. The majority of people that responded had been happy with the service they received.

We visited the service's head office where records of people using the service were kept and maintained. We spoke with the recently appointed general manager who will be making an application to the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to become the registered manager at this location. We also spoke with other office based staff.

We saw people using the service were provided with detailed information to help them prepare for their appointment and tests. People were given opportunities to discuss their proposed tests with staff if they had any issues or concerns about them. Information about these tests was also available in leaflet form and on the service's website. We looked at people's records and saw people received the tests that had been planned for them.

Staff were provided with appropriate guidance and instructions about what they should do to protect people and children who may be at risk of abuse, harm or neglect.

Managers ensured clinical staff employed by the service kept their skills and knowledge up to date. Office based staff received training appropriate to their roles.

The service actively sought the views and experiences of people using the service and took appropriate action to make improvements where these were needed. There were also regular staff meetings and visits to the four sites which enabled managers to identify changes and improvements that were needed to the quality of service provided.