We found that there were suitable systems in place to gain consent from patients. Care and treatment was assessed, planned and delivered in order to meet their needs. This was fully documented and reviewed and patients were fully informed and involved in their care or treatment. We spoke to one patient and saw completed surveys from others which all demonstrated they were satisfied with the service. One comment made was:

“It’s really friendly, they made me feel at ease”.

The provider had systems in place in order to minimise the risk of infection to patients, staff and visitors to the clinic. Audits were undertaken regularly to monitor infection prevention and control. Cleaning schedules were delivered effectively and staff were aware of their responsibilities with respect to infection prevention and control.

Staff were inducted, trained, supervised and appraised appropriately and told us they were well supported by the manager and provider.

We found the provider had effective systems in place for monitoring the quality of services. Regular audits were undertaken, there was an effective complaints process and regular patient satisfaction surveys were undertaken. Quality monitoring, learning from events and continuous improvement to service provision was seen to be an important feature in the culture and work practice of the clinic and the provider. Structures clearly identified responsibilities and quality monitoring was promoted and supported by the provider.

We spoke with three patients who used the service they made the following comments:

“I was referred here by my GP the time I waited for an appointment was very short I think I only had to wait two weeks which was fantastic”.

“They rang me to make arrangements for an appointment and then followed that up with a letter with information about who they were. I have been very impressed with the service and how quickly you are seen.”

We spoke with three members of staff who told us they treated all patients with dignity and respect and ensured their privacy and right to confidentiality was maintained.

Healthcare records showed assessment (triage) was carried out to determine whether an individual would benefit from the services provided. Healthcare plans identified medical history information and the healthcare need to be treated.

Records showed that if the service felt unable to offer treatment there were systems in place to refer people back to their GP or to secondary healthcare services for acute or urgent treatment.

Peninsula Health LLP had systems in place to ensure the equipment used was well maintained and fit for purpose.

There were effective recruitment and selection processes in place.

The service had a complaints policy and procedure in place a copy of which, was displayed by the reception desk in the waiting area. Records and a discussion with the manager showed where complaints had been made they had been recorded and action had been taken.

On the day of the inspection visit there were limited opportunities to speak with people who used the service. The Provider was asked to seek permission for us to contact people who used their service by telephone to seek their views. People who used the service chose not to speak with us.

No issues of concern were raised by other stakeholders who commissioned services from Peninsula Health.

Internal quality assurance systems showed that overall people were happy with the service they received from Peninsula Health.