On the day of our inspection a paediatric clinic was being held at the Pinn Medical Centre. We were able to speak to three relatives of children receiving treatment. One relative told us, "this is a very good service. The doctor asked us about our full medical and family history." Another relative said, “the doctor looks after my son very well. The doctor asked us a lot of questions.” The same relative told us, “the doctor is very caring. She understands.” All people we spoke with told us they were happy with the service and it fully met their expectations.

People were asked for their consent before they received care and treatment and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs. Their care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual assessment.

People's needs were assessed and a detailed medical history was taken from each person and discussed prior to their healthcare assessment or treatment. Treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual plan.

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed. People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment.

The provider informed us of the process they used to recruit staff. We found however there was a lack of employment checks, such as references and criminal records checks completed before staff had been employed.

There was an effective complaints system available. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately.

There were no patients at the service during our inspection. We looked at patient feedback and responses in the provider satisfaction survey and this gave us information about their views of the service. In the most recent survey of patients satisfaction the majority rated the service as good or excellent. Patients comments included: "very satisfied with the care provided", and "a better experience than I had expected, the consultant is very easy to talk to an explained things very well" and "very good service".

We found that people who use the service were able to choose an appointment time and location that suited their needs. Information was provided to them that explained about the service and what they should expect to receive. There was an easy to follow complaints procedure in place if people who use the service were unhappy.

We found that the provider listened to the views of people who use the service in order to improve the care and treatment that was available. People were encouraged to express their views about the service they received.

There were no patients at the clinic during our inspection. We have therefore used patient feedback and responses in the provider satisfaction survey to give their views of the service.

The majority of patients were satisfied with the service they had received. One patient commented “excellent service throughout” another said that the clinic they had attended was “an improvement on hospital visits”, another said the service was “second to none” and “top of the class”.

Patient’s comments from the anticoagulation clinic survey included “I have no complaints” and “It is exceptionally good and needs no improvement on the service given