Medical Hair Restoration Clinic (Manchester) Limited Also known as MHR Clinic

Updated 22 September 2022

Medical Hair Restoration Clinic (Manchester) Limited is a cosmetic hair restoration and transplant service. The service provides surgical procedures, medical treatments and supplementary therapies to service users in Cheshire, Manchester and the surrounding areas. Medical and supplementary hair loss therapies, for example medicines, solutions and laser treatments are not regulated by the Care Quality Commission. Therefore, for the purpose of this inspection, we only looked at the surgical hair transplant service provided at the clinic. This included follicular unit extraction (FUE) and implantation procedures and follicular unit transplantation procedures (FUT). The service employed one surgeon who was a member of the British Association of Hair Restoration Surgeons (BHRS) and the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery. Information provided by the service showed the surgeon had performed 94 hair transplant surgeries at the clinic from August 2021 to July 2022.

The company was registered with Care Quality Commission (CQC) on 13 November 2020 and had a registered manager and nominated individual in place. This was the first inspection of the service. The service is registered for the regulated activity of surgical procedures.

Updated 22 September 2022

This was the first time we had inspected this service. We rated it good because:

• There was enough staff. The service was visibly clean, well maintained and controlled infection risks well. Processes were in place to manage safety.
• Staff gave service users food, fluids and pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent.
• Staff treated service users with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions.
• The service took account of service users individual needs and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• The management team were visible and approachable, there was a positive culture and staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with service users and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However,

• Not all staff had all the required mandatory training at the appropriate level, the area adjacent to the reception was potentially unsafe and there were limited documented clinical guidelines or procedures.
• Some governance and risk management processes were in place, but more work was needed to ensure the management team had robust oversight and assurance.

Updated 22 September 2022

We had not previously rated this service. We rated it as good because:

• The service had enough staff to care for service users and keep them safe. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to service users, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines and safety incidents well.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave service users enough to eat and drink, and gave them pain relief when they needed it. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of service users, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information.
• Staff treated service users with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their conditions. They provided emotional support to service users.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of their clients, took account of service users’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
• Leaders ran the service well and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of service users receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with service users and the community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• Staff did not have all the required training in key skills for a healthcare setting. Not all equipment was stored safely. The service did not have documented clinical procedures or a procedure for staff to follow in the event of anyone becoming unwell in the clinic.
• We did not see evidence of appropriate references for staff employed by the service.
• We did not see evidence of any shared learning from audits, safety incidents or changes to practice to improve the service. Risk management processes were not robust. We did not see evidence that recruitment was in line with the service policy.

We rated this service as good because it was effective, caring, responsive and well led, although safety required improvement.