The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Old Orchard Consulting Rooms

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

7b, Old Orchard Road, Eastbourne, BN21 1DB (01323) 748807

Provided and run by:
ENT Eastbourne Limited

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

Date of Assessment: 5 March 2026. Old Orchard Consulting Rooms is an independent service providing consultations with named consultant doctors. Treatments, including the carrying out of surgical procedures are typically provided at locations different to the service’s registered address under a practicing privileges arrangement. People can access the service on a fee-paying basis only.

The service is open from 9am to 5pm from Monday to Friday and runs from the ground floor of converted premises which are owned by the provider.

We carried out this assessment to follow-up on concerns we identified at a previous inspection.

The service had a positive learning culture and people could raise concerns. The service had now carried out risk assessments to cover environmental risks including fire safety and legionella infection. The facilities and equipment met the needs of people, were clean and well-maintained. There were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience and the service had improved its monitoring of required training and had documented completed staff recruitment checks. The service had now had a system in place to receive and review national safety alerts. The service was also now able to demonstrate that all staff and clinicians had completed required training including safeguarding training to the appropriate level.

People were involved in assessments of their needs. Staff took account of people’s communication, personal and health needs. Care was based on latest evidence and good practice. The clinicians made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent. The service now included written consent forms completed by people using the service as part of the clinical record and could provide evidence of audits of treatment outcomes.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and treatment. The service supported staff wellbeing.

People were involved in decisions about their care. The service provided information people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service took it seriously and acted on it. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination.

Leaders and staff had a shared vision. The leaders were visible, knowledgeable and supportive, helping staff develop in their roles. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The service had improved governance systems, including reviewing and updating the policies used by the service; taking a more comprehensive approach to risk and was now documenting evidence of performance.

The service is no longer in breach of regulations relating to safe care and treatment; good governance and staffing.

20 February 2023

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Requires improvement overall.

The key questions are rated as:

Are services safe? – Requires improvement

Are services effective? – Requires improvement

Are services caring? – Good

Are services responsive? – Good

Are services well-led? – Requires improvement

We carried out this announced comprehensive inspection of Old Orchard Consulting Rooms on 20 February 2023, under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008. This was the provider’s first inspection of the service since it registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

How we carried out the inspection:

This inspection was carried out in a way which enabled us to spend a minimum amount of time on site.

This included:

  • Speaking with staff in person, on the telephone and using video conferencing.
  • Requesting documentary evidence from the provider.
  • A site visit.

We carried out an announced site visit to the service on 20 February 2023. Prior to our visit we requested documentary evidence electronically from the provider. We spoke to staff on the telephone and using video conferencing prior to and following our site visit.

Old Orchard Consulting Rooms is an independent service providing consultation and examination with consultant surgeons, specialising in urology, colorectal and general surgery. Treatment for haemorrhoids, using haemorrhoid banding is provided by one colorectal surgeon. (Banding is an outpatient treatment wherebya special rubber band is placed round the base of the haemorrhoid which constricts and cuts off the blood supply.)

Old Orchard Consulting Rooms is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the following regulated activities: Treatment of disease, disorder or injury; Diagnostic and screening procedures.

The medical director of the service, although no longer involved in the delivery of clinical care, is the 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:

  • There were safeguarding systems and processes to keep people safe. However, some staff had not completed training in the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults at an appropriate level to support their role, in line with current guidance.
  • There were processes in place for the induction and monitoring of training of administration staff. There was a lack of evidence of completed training for consultants.
  • There were records to demonstrate that recruitment checks had been carried out in accordance with regulations for administration staff. However, there was a lack of checks undertaken of clinical consultants.
  • Arrangements for chaperoning were displayed. However, the offer or attendance of a chaperone was not recorded within the patient’s clinical record.
  • There were some processes to assess the risk of, and prevent, detect and control the spread of infection. However, there was no formal assessment of the risks associated with legionella bacteria.
  • Staff immunisation status was not monitored in line with current guidance.
  • There were governance and monitoring processes to ensure the safety of premises, including fire safety. However, there was a lack of a documented fire risk assessment for the premises.
  • There were effective administrative processes in place to ensure patients had timely access to consultation and treatment.
  • Patient consent to treatment and risks and complications of treatment were not recorded in clinical records.
  • There was a lack of monitoring and audit of clinical record keeping.
  • The service was not registered to receive safety alerts.
  • There was effective and open communication and information sharing amongst the small staff team. There were regular team meetings and staff felt motivated to contribute to driving improvement within the service.
  • Staff were subject to regular review of their performance and felt well supported by managers.
  • Written policies did not always provide accurate and clear information to staff in line with current guidance.
  • Service users were asked to provide feedback on the service they had received and there were high levels of patient satisfaction across the service.
  • Complaints were managed appropriately.

The areas where the provider must make improvements as they are in breach of regulations are:

  • Ensure care and treatment is provided in a safe way to patients.
  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.
  • Ensure persons employed in the provision of the regulated activity receive the appropriate support, training, professional development, supervision and appraisal necessary to enable them to carry out their duties.

(Please see the specific details on actions required at the end of this report).

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Further review COSHH risk assessment and take action to ensure the safe use of chemicals used to decontaminate suction device.
  • Secure external clinical waste storage to prevent improper use or access.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

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