Archived: DrMediSpa & Yourhairdoc

DrMediSpa & Yourhairdoc is operated by Priors Medical Limited. It is a small independent cosmetic clinic. The service has two procedure rooms and three consultation rooms.

The service provides a range of cosmetic treatments. We inspected their cosmetic surgery services.

To inspect the service we used our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the announced inspection on 2 July 2019.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Services we rate

This was our first inspection of this service. We rated it as Good overall.

We found good practice:

• Staff cared for patients with compassion, kindness and respect. They made sure that people’s privacy and dignity needs were understood and always respected.
• The clinic had enough medical and support staff with the appropriate skills, knowledge and experience to deliver safe and effective care, support and treatment.
• The service treats incidents and complaints seriously. Managers investigated them, shared lessons learned with staff, and made improvements to service provision where indicated.
• Staff followed infection prevention and control practices to reduce risks to patients.
• Risks to patients were assessed and their safety was monitored and managed so they were supported to stay safe.
• The service had suitable premises and equipment and looked after them well.
• The management team promoted a positive culture that supported and valued staff, creating a sense of common purpose based on shared values. Staff worked well together and were committed to providing the best possible care for their patients.
• Patients were supported to make informed decisions about their chosen procedures and treatments, and were given sensible expectations.
• Patient records were clear, up-to-date and complete. They were easily accessible to staff.

However, we also found areas that require improvement:

• The service did not monitor patient outcomes.
• Not all patients’ individual needs were considered. The toilets were on the first floor and not accessible to wheelchair users.

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make other improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.

Name of signatory

Heidi Smoult

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals