The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Archived: The Cavendish Clinic

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

185 New Kings Road, London, SW6 4SW

Provided and run by:
London Health and Aesthetics Limited

All Inspections

17 August 2022 6 September 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection took place in October 2018 and the service was found to be meeting the relevant standards).

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 The Cavendish Clinic, Parsons Green on 17 August 2022 as part of our inspection programme.

When we previously inspected the service in October 2018, we found the service was meeting the relevant standards, however, we identified some areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Establish cold chain policy and procedures.

The Cavendish Clinic is a private clinic that specialises in aesthetic treatments and minor surgery.

The service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

The Cavendish Clinic provides a range of surgical and non-surgical cosmetic interventions, for example aesthetic cosmetic treatments which are not within CQC scope of registration and therefore these treatments were not inspected. At the time of this inspection the treatments offered at the Cavendish Clinic which were in scope of their CQC registration were: Botulinum Toxin for the treatment of hyperhidrosis, Polydioxanone (PDO) Thread Lifts, and treatments of moles, skin tags and warts.

The clinic director 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:

  • The service had implemented an appropriate cold chain policy.
  • They kept written records of verbal interactions as well as written correspondence.
  • The provider ensured that facilities and equipment were safe and that equipment was maintained according to manufacturers’ instructions. There were systems for safely managing healthcare waste.
  • All new clinical and non-clinical staff undertook induction training which varied according to their role.
  • Staff understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making.
  • Staff treated patients with kindness respect and compassion, as evidenced by patient feedback from the annual patient survey.
  • The provider understood the needs of their patients and improved services in response to those needs. For example, the service responded promptly to any patient concerns.
  • The facilities and premises were appropriate for the services delivered.
  • There was a clear vision and set of values. The service had a realistic strategy and supporting business plans to achieve priorities.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

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

18 October 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 18 October 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. 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.

The Cavendish Clinic is a private clinic that specialises in aesthetic treatments and minor surgery.

This service is registered with CQC under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 in respect of some, but not all, of the services it provides. There are some exemptions from regulation by CQC which relate to particular types of regulated activities and services and these are set out in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2 of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The Cavendish Clinic provides a range of surgical and non-surgical cosmetic interventions, for example the aesthetic cosmetic treatments which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we were only able to inspect the treatment for minor surgery but not the aesthetic cosmetic services.

Ms Lisa Littlehales 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.

We received feedback from four people about the service, including comment cards, all of which were very positive about the service and indicated that clients were treated with kindness and respect. Staff were described as helpful, caring, thorough and professional.

It should be noted that the service had been closed for 12 weeks due to flood damage and was not fully operational at the time of inspection.

Our key findings were:

  • The facilities were appropriate to meet people’s needs.
  • Medicines were used safely and appropriately.
  • There was an annual audit of patient records to support safe prescribing.
  • Staff were caring, supportive, and treated patients with dignity and respect.
  • The manager encouraged an open and honest culture, and staff we spoke with were aware of the vision for the service.
  • There was a comprehensive set of policies and procedures governing all activities.
  • There was evidence of quality improvement.
  • The provider was aware of their responsibility to respect people’s diversity and human rights.
  • Patients were able to access care and treatment from the service within an appropriate timescale for their needs.
  • There was a complaints procedure in place and information on how to complain was readily available.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Establish cold chain policy and procedures.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice