Review of compliance Tollgate Clinic Limited Tollgate Clinic Region: Location address: Type of service: East 145 London Road Stanway Colchester Essex CO3 8NZ Acute services without overnight beds / listed acute services with or without overnight beds Doctors consultation service Diagnostic and/or screening service Doctors treatment service Date of Publication: November 2012 Overview of the service: The Tollgate Clinic provides a service to NHS and private patients for diagnostic and minor surgical procedures. Page 1 of 19
Summary of our findings for the essential standards of quality and safety Our current overall judgement Tollgate Clinic was meeting all the essential standards of quality and safety inspected. The summary below describes why we carried out this review, what we found and any action required. Why we carried out this review We carried out this review as part of our routine schedule of planned reviews. How we carried out this review We reviewed all the information we hold about this provider, carried out a visit on 5 October 2012, looked at records of people who use services, talked to staff and talked to people who use services. What people told us We did not speak with people who use the service because on the day of our visit the people who were at the clinic were undergoing surgical procedures. The general manager informed us that people using the service were routinely surveyed following their visit to determine their views on the quality of the service provided. We looked at the results for the surveys for August/September 2012 and these showed overall a very high rate of satisfaction with regard to receiving information, convenience of appointment, service received and staff. We saw compliment cards with positive comments such as "Thank you for making it such a positive experience." What we found about the standards we reviewed and how well Tollgate Clinic was meeting them Outcome 01: People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run The provider was meeting this standard. People understood the care and treatment choices available to them and had their views and experiences taken into account. Outcome 02: Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it The provider was meeting this standard. Before people received any treatment or procedure they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Page 2 of 19
Outcome 04: People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights The provider was meeting this standard. People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Outcome 07: People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights The provider was meeting this standard. People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Outcome 12: People should be cared for by staff who are properly qualified and able to do their job The provider was meeting this standard. People were cared for and treated by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Outcome 14: Staff should be properly trained and supervised, and have the chance to develop and improve their skills The provider was meeting this standard. People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. Outcome 16: The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care The provider was meeting this standard. The provider had effective systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. Other information Please see previous reports for more information about previous reviews. Page 3 of 19
What we found for each essential standard of quality and safety we reviewed Page 4 of 19
The following pages detail our findings and our regulatory judgement for each essential standard and outcome that we reviewed, linked to specific regulated activities where appropriate. We will have reached one of the following judgements for each essential standard. Compliant means that people who use services are experiencing the outcomes relating to the essential standard. Where we judge that a provider is non-compliant with a standard, we make a judgement about whether the impact on people who use the service (or others) is minor, moderate or major: A minor impact means that people who use the service experienced poor care that had an impact on their health, safety or welfare or there was a risk of this happening. The impact was not significant and the matter could be managed or resolved quickly. A moderate impact means that people who use the service experienced poor care that had a significant effect on their health, safety or welfare or there was a risk of this happening. The matter may need to be resolved quickly. A major impact means that people who use the service experienced poor care that had a serious current or long term impact on their health, safety and welfare, or there was a risk of this happening. The matter needs to be resolved quickly. Where we identify compliance, no further action is taken. Where we have concerns, the most appropriate action is taken to ensure that the necessary changes are made. More information about each of the outcomes can be found in the Guidance about compliance: Essential standards of quality and safety Page 5 of 19
Outcome 01: Respecting and involving people who use services What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them. * Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support. * Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected. * Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 01: Respecting and involving people who use services Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence The Tollgate Clinic was located in a purpose built building at ground level that provided easy access and facilities for people with a mobility problem. Referrals were received from GPs through NHS (National Health Service), the private sector and NHS Choice giving people the right to choose how and where they access the service. People who use the service were provided with a range of information prior to treatment. There was a website with up to date information about the location and services offered and there were a range of leaflets available. The leaflets were very informative about each of the procedures provided, how they were carried out and what to expect. Written information was not provided and had not yet been required in alternative formats or languages. The general manager told us that they would address this in their business plan. Page 6 of 19
All consultations took place in a private consultation room. Following a surgical or diagnostic procedure each person was invited to give their feedback and comments through a short survey on a touch screen system. The provider was meeting this standard. People understood the care and treatment choices available to them and had their views and experiences taken into account. Page 7 of 19
Outcome 02: Consent to care and treatment What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive. * Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed. * Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 02: Consent to care and treatment Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence During our visit we looked at the arrangements the service had in place for obtaining valid consent from people prior to undergoing minor surgery or a diagnostic procedure. We saw that there were consent forms in place for the different diagnostic and surgical procedures provided. As part of the process for gaining consent each person was provided with written information about the procedure or surgery they were going to have, together with their booking confirmation. This enabled people to make an informed decision. We were also told by the general manager that signed consent was obtained from people by the doctor performing the procedure prior to the procedure being undertaken. This gave people the opportunity for clarification and to ask questions. The provider may find it useful to know that we found that the policy for consent did not include capacity and decision making for people who were unable to give consent. We were told that there was a reliance on the referrer to provide the relevant information. Following discussion the general manager advised that arrangements would be put in Page 8 of 19
place to address this. We were told that a specific consent form was used for men under 30 years undergoing a vasectomy. The doctors always checked to ensure that men under 30 years had been counselled by their GP or referrer. If they had not received counselling then this was provided by the service in a separate consultation one week before having the operation. This is because the clinical and social implications with regard to the future had to be considered fully. The provider was meeting this standard. Before people received any treatment or procedure they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Page 9 of 19
Outcome 04: Care and welfare of people who use services What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 04: Care and welfare of people who use services Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence The clinic was linked to the GP computer system and therefore had electronic access to peoples medical and medication history and known allergies. People were assessed prior to receiving treatment or procedure, particularly with regard to the management of carpal tunnel syndrome to ascertain the best treatment for example splint, injection or surgery. We saw written post operative instructions and emergency contact details which were given out routinely. People received either a follow up appointment or telephone call eight days after their operation. This helped to ensure that there were no complications in healing process and provided reassurance. At the time of our visit there were no medications kept on the premises apart from local anaesthetic, which was stored appropriately and securely. Emergency equipment and emergency medication were accessible and available. They were provided by the GP practice located in the same building. We spoke with the practice nurse from the GP surgery responsible for the equipment and medication and saw records that showed that they were checked regularly to ensure they were fit for purpose. Page 10 of 19
The provider was meeting this standard. People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Page 11 of 19
Outcome 07: Safeguarding people who use services from abuse What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 07: Safeguarding people who use services from abuse Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. There was a safeguarding policy in place to guide staff, which included how to contact the local safeguarding adults team at the local authority, if abuse was suspected.the service had a whistle blowing policy in place to protect, support and guide staff to report any concerns they may have about the service or a staff member. The staff spoken with demonstrated a good understanding about their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding children and vulnerable adults, including identifying abuse and what they should do if they had suspected abuse. The provider was meeting this standard. People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Page 12 of 19
Outcome 12: Requirements relating to workers What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by staff who are fit, appropriately qualified and are physically and mentally able to do their job. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 12: Requirements relating to workers Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence We found that the clinic had a small and friendly clinical team which comprised of three doctors and a registered nurse. They were supported by an administration team, general manager and registered manager. We saw from records that all staff had been subject to necessary checks including an enhanced criminal record bureau (CRB) check to ensure their suitability for their role. All three clinicians at the clinic were accredited with the Primary Care Trust (PCT), registered with the General Medical Council (GMC) and had a current professional indemnity insurance. The lead clinician was the President of the Association of Surgeons in Primary Care (ASPC) and the founder member of the British Association of No Scalpel Vasectomists (BANSV). Records showed that the clinical team had the relevant qualifications, skills and experience to carry out their role. The provider was meeting this standard. People were cared for and treated by suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Page 13 of 19
Outcome 14: Supporting workers What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Are safe and their health and welfare needs are met by competent staff. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 14: Supporting workers Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. The doctors were medical professionals, registered with a licence to practice with the General Medical Council (GMC). We saw evidence of continued professional development to maintain registration. We were told that the doctors received annual appraisals through the Essex appraisal scheme. The clinic contracted with local Consultants to provide mentorship to the doctors in the specialisms provided at the clinic. This included clinical update, literature review, assessment of capabilities and joint consultation with patients when required. The nurse was registered with the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC). The nurse told us that there were plenty of opportunities for training and that she felt well supported at the clinic. Records showed evidence of training received relevant to the role. Meetings were held every two months for all staff to discuss issues and share information. All staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable people. Page 14 of 19
The provider was meeting this standard. People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. Page 15 of 19
Outcome 16: Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision What the outcome says This is what people who use services should expect. People who use services: * Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety. What we found The provider is compliant with Outcome 16: Assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision Our findings What people who use the service experienced and told us We did not speak with people who use the service at this visit. Other evidence We saw that there were systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service provided to people using the service. People who used the service were surveyed to determine their views on the quality of the services provided. The results of the surveys were analysed on a monthly basis. We saw that the results for the August/September 2012 surveys showed a very high rate of satisfaction with the service overall. The provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service. There was a procedure in place for recording, investigating and responding to complaints. There were no complaints received in the past year. Clinical Meetings were held every two months for all staff. The minutes of the last meeting showed that a range of topics such as critical incidents, clinical issues, change in practice, health and safety issues, clinical governance, recent research, general business and areas for improvement were discussed and actions agreed. The clinic had systems in place for gathering and evaluating accurate information about the quality and safety of the care and treatment the service provides and its outcomes. We saw evidence of clinical audits that were conducted on a yearly basis. Page 16 of 19
The provider was meeting this standard. The provider had effective systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. Page 17 of 19
What is a review of compliance? By law, providers of certain adult social care and health care services have a legal responsibility to make sure they are meeting essential standards of quality and safety. These are the standards everyone should be able to expect when they receive care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has written guidance about what people who use services should experience when providers are meeting essential standards, called Guidance about compliance: Essential standards of quality and safety. CQC licenses services if they meet essential standards and will constantly monitor whether they continue to do so. We formally review services when we receive information that is of concern and as a result decide we need to check whether a service is still meeting one or more of the essential standards. We also formally review them at least every two years to check whether a service is meeting all of the essential standards in each of their locations. Our reviews include checking all available information and intelligence we hold about a provider. We may seek further information by contacting people who use services, public representative groups and organisations such as other regulators. We may also ask for further information from the provider and carry out a visit with direct observations of care. Where we judge that providers are not meeting essential standards, we may set compliance actions or take enforcement action: Compliance actions: These are actions a provider must take so that they achieve compliance with the essential standards. We ask them to send us a report that says what they will do to make sure they comply. We monitor the implementation of action plans in these reports and, if necessary, take further action to make sure that essential standards are met. Enforcement action: These are actions we take using the criminal and/or civil procedures in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and relevant regulations. These enforcement powers are set out in the law and mean that we can take swift, targeted action where services are failing people. Page 18 of 19
Information for the reader Document purpose Author Audience Further copies from Copyright Review of compliance report Care Quality Commission The general public 03000 616161 / www.cqc.org.uk Copyright (2010) Care Quality Commission (CQC). This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part, free of charge, in any format or medium provided that it is not used for commercial gain. This consent is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and on proviso that it is not used in a derogatory manner or misleading context. The material should be acknowledged as CQC copyright, with the title and date of publication of the document specified. Care Quality Commission Website www.cqc.org.uk Telephone 03000 616161 Email address Postal address enquiries@cqc.org.uk Care Quality Commission Citygate Gallowgate Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 4PA Page 19 of 19