Archived: Centre for Surgery - Crawford Street

Updated 14 April 2020

Acuitus Medical – London is operated by Acuitus Medical Ltd. The service opened in February 2019 for non-surgical procedures and started carrying out regulated activities in April 2019. It is a private cosmetic surgery clinic in London. The clinic accepts self-referrals from patients living in London and nationally. The service does not provide services to NHS-funded patients or patients under the age of 18. It provides a range of cosmetic procedures including rhinoplasty (nose reconstruction), rhytidectomy (facelift), breast augmentation (implants), liposuction (fat removal) and abdominoplasty (tummy tuck). All patients are seen on a day case basis.

The service has had a registered manager in post since opening at this location in 2019.

The clinic also offers non-surgical cosmetic procedures. We did not inspect these services because they were not within our scope of regulation.

Updated 14 April 2020

Acuitus Medical – London is operated by Acuitus Medical Ltd. The service provides elective cosmetic surgery for self-funding patients aged 18 years and over. Facilities include one operating theatre, a combined admissions room and recovery room and two consultation rooms. There is also a waiting room, toilet and changing facilities.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. We carried out the inspection on 20 February 2020. We gave staff 48 working hours’ notice we were coming to inspect to ensure the availability of the registered manager and patients.

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 is the first time we rated this service. We rated it as Good overall because:

• The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned lessons from them. Staff collected safety information and used it to improve the service.
• Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients 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 patients, advised them on their treatment, supported them to make decisions about their care, and had access to good information. Key services were available five days a week.
• Staff treated patients 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 patients.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of the patient population, took account of patients’ 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 services well using reliable information systems 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. Staff focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. All staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• We found two policies on safeguarding and infection prevention control containing an outdated or incorrect reference. One of these was corrected following our inspection feedback.
• The service did not currently subscribe to the Independent Sector Complaints Adjudication Service (ISCAS), which is a voluntary subscriber scheme for the independent review of complaints. Although this is not mandatory, it is best practice for providers in the independent sector.
• The strategy of the service was not clear. No formal strategy document was provided.
• Response rates to patient surveys tended to be low.

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

Dr Nigel Acheson

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals (London and South)

Updated 14 April 2020

Cosmetic surgery is the sole core service provided at this location. We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring responsive and well-led.