Cranley Clinic

Updated 13 January 2023

We inspected this service on 22 November 2022, as the service was placed in special measures in March 2022, to assess if sufficient improvements have been made in response to previously identified concerns.

We previously inspected this service, using our comprehensive inspection methodology, in March 2022. During the inspection, we identified numerous concerns. As a result, on 31 March 2022, we served an Urgent Notice to Suspend the provider’s registration to deliver regulated activities. The notice was issued for an initial period of three months to allow the provider to make improvements. Following the inspection, we took immediate action to suspend all regulatory activity at the provider for three months. In addition, we placed the provider in Special Measures. Following this inspection the provider has made significant improvements and is no longer in Special Measures.

We re-inspected the service in June 2022, using our focused inspection methodology, to review the improvements made by the provider in specific areas of concern identified in the suspension notice only. We used our focused inspection methodology to review actions taken in response to previous areas of concern. At the time of the inspection, the service was not operational. This meant we were unable to assess the impact of the improvements made by the provider on patients and practical service delivery. However, we found that the service had made sufficient improvements for the suspension to be lifted.

Cranley Clinic is operated by Cranley Clinic Limited. The service registered with CQC at this location in January 2018.

The service focused on dermatology outpatients and dentistry. The service offered dermatology consultations and minor surgical procedures. At the time of the inspection, due to previous regulatory action being taken by CQC, the service did not operate at its potential full capacity, with 44 regulated care and treatment episodes being delivered in the five months before the inspection.

The bulk of the provider’s work is unregulated aesthetics and skin care, such as dermabrasion and laser treatment. We do not inspect these services.

Updated 13 January 2023

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff, with appropriate training in key skills, to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records.
• Staff provided good care and treatment and gave patients pain relief when they needed it. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and supported them to make decisions about their care.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions.
• The service planned care to take account of patient's individual needs and made it easy for people to give feedback.
• Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.

However:

• The emergency response kits were not standardised, and not all staff were aware of its content.
• The service did not carry out radiography audits six-monthly in line with current guidance.
• There was no central log of external referrals made to ensure traceability, follow-up, and the best patient outcomes were achieved.
• The service did not have an overarching action log, for accountability purposes, to keep track of all actions recommended by internal audits and other quality monitoring tools.
• Although the service developed many new procedures and policies not all of them were fully comprehensive.
• The service continued to develop its leadership and clinical leadership structures. It was still too early to judge if the changes implemented were sustainable and fully embedded.

Updated 13 January 2023

The rating of the service has improved since our last inspection. We rated this service as good because it was safe, caring and responsive, although leadership requires improvement. We do not currently rate effective domain for outpatients.

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff, with appropriate training in key skills, to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records.
• Staff provided good care and treatment and gave patients pain relief when they needed it. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and supported them to make decisions about their care.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions.
• The service planned care to take account of patient's individual needs and made it easy for people to give feedback.
• Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care.

However:

• The emergency response kits were not standardised, and not all staff were aware of its content.
• The service did not carry out radiography audits six-monthly in line with current guidance.
• There was no central log of external referrals made to ensure traceability, follow-up, and the best patient outcomes were achieved.
• The service did not have an overarching action log, for accountability purposes, to keep track of all actions recommended by internal audits and other quality monitoring tools.
• Although the service developed many new procedures and policies not all of them were fully comprehensive.
• The service continued to develop its leadership and clinical leadership structures. It was still too early to judge if the changes implemented were sustainable and fully embedded.