The Care Quality Commission
  • Doctor
  • Independent doctor

Healthclic Limited

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Third Floor, Landsdowne House, 57 Berkeley Square, London, W1J 6ER (020) 3713 4117

Provided and run by:
Healthclic Limited

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

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

22 August 2022

During a routine inspection

This service is rated as Good overall. (Previous inspection September 2018, where the service was not rated but was meeting the standards of care.)

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 Healthclic Limited, Third Floor, Landsdowne House, 57 Berkeley Square, London, W1J 6ER, to enable the Commission to provide a quality rating for the services provided.

The provider offers four types of service. A concierge/annual membership retainer service, where the patient paid an annual membership fee to register with the service that provided patients with unlimited home visits and a personalised health assessment. A home visit consultations and virtual consultation, where patients access the service on a pay-as-you-go basis. A case management, where the GP will co-ordinate treatment for patients with complex cases and a whole genome sequencing service.

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 which are not within CQC scope of registration. Therefore, we did not inspect or report on these services.

The clinical 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.

The service sought feedback following each consultation. We saw feedback from twenty patients from the previous six months, which were positive and 18 had scored the service 10 out of a maximum of 10, and two stated they were nine. Positive comments made were about the professionalism of the staff, the quality of the service and the convivence and accessibility of the appointments.

Our key findings were:

  • Systems and processes were in place to keep people safe. Staff had undertaken adult and child safeguarding training.
  • Governance arrangements were in place. There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.
  • Patients’ immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. Where appropriate this included their clinical needs and their mental and physical wellbeing.
  • Prior to a face-to-face appointment, the patients received a telephone call to assess their needs both before and after the face-to-face appointments.
  • The service obtained consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance.
  • The service had an infection control policy and procedures were in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.
  • The service shared relevant information with other services appropriately and in a timely way.
  • The provider had system in place for staff who were lone working.

The areas where the provider should make improvements are:

  • Consider whether the limited emergency medicines carried by the doctor will be sufficient for any unidentified or emerging illness.
  • Put in place a fail safe administration system to ensure all high-risk monitoring is carried out.
  • Review the systems in place that check patient consultation records contain all the necessary details to make sure they are fully effective.

Dr Sean O’Kelly BSc MB ChB MSc DCH FRCA

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

4 September 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of HealthClic Limited on 4 September 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 provider is registered with the CQC to carry out the regulated activities diagnostic and screening procedures and treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

The service provides face-to-face private GP appointments for adults and children in their home or hotel. The service does not see any patients at its registered premises. Therefore, we were unable to speak to any patients during the inspection. However, four patients provided feedback directly to the Care Quality Commission (CQC). All comments were positive about the service experienced. Patients told us they felt the service was professional and the team were friendly, compassionate and caring.

Our key findings were:

  • There were systems in place to safeguard children and vulnerable adults from abuse and staff we spoke with knew how to identify and report safeguarding concerns. Staff had been trained to a level appropriate to their role.
  • The service had systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen. When incidents did happen, the service learned from them and improved their processes.
  • The provider carried out staff checks on recruitment, including checks of professional registration where relevant.
  • Clinical staff we spoke with were aware of current evidence-based guidance and they had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.
  • There was evidence of quality improvement, including clinical audit.
  • Consent procedures were in place and these were in line with legal requirements.
  • Systems were in place to protect personal information about patients. The service was registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
  • Patients could access care and treatment from the service within an appropriate timescale for their needs.
  • Information about services and how to complain was available.
  • The service had proactively gathered feedback from patients.
  • Governance arrangements were in place. There were clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.
  • The provider was aware of and complied with the requirements of the Duty of Candour and encouraged a culture of openness and honesty.

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

  • Review the system for documenting patient interaction in clinical notes.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice