1/5 Slim C. 9 months ago on Google
This
was
reported
in
the
‘Metro’
newspaper
today
based
on
reports
from
the
CQC.
(22-05-2023)
The
23
private
and
NHS
hospitals
which
were
rated
'inadequate'
during
their
most
recent
CQC
inspection
included:
Gosforth
Private
Clinic,
Newcastle.
Following
the
reply
on
12-07-2023:
Good
to
hear
that
there
are
improvements,
pity
that
the
CQC
doesn’t
seem
to
follow
up
with
this
in
the
inspection
reports
section.
The
CQC
website
notes
that
the
original
inspection
was
September
2021,
CQC
returned
December
2021
(not
2
years
ago!)
and
there
seem
to
be
14
areas
listed
for
the
‘inadequate’
grading,
this
was
then
followed
up
in
February
2022
(not
2
years
ago!)
and
it
seems
there
are
10
areas
listed
from
them
for
‘inadequate’.
CQC
inspection
report
February
2022:
‘Updated
17
February
2022
This
is
our
first
inspection
of
this
location.
We
rated
it
as
inadequate
because:
The
provider
was
unable
to
provide
any
policies,
procedures,
risk
assessments
or
standard
operating
procedures
that
they
used
to
make
sure
patients
were
safe
from
the
risk
of
harm.
There
was
no
policy
in
place
accessible
to
staff
about
how
to
manage
deteriorating
patients.
There
was
no
information
for
staff
working
at
the
service
about
their
responsibilities
in
relation
to
clinical
records.
There
were
no
clinical
records
held
onsite,
the
provider
was
unclear
how
clinicians
documented
in
and
managed
clinical
records
and
there
was
no
policy
stating
how
or
where
clinical
records
should
be
stored.
The
provider
was
unable
to
assure
us
that
there
was
a
consent
policy
or
that
staff
followed
the
correct
process
to
obtain
patient
consent.
The
provider
had
no
duty
of
candour
policy
and
was
unsure
of
their
full
responsibilities
in
the
case
of
an
incident
requiring
formal
duty
of
candour.
The
provider
kept
staff
files,
but
these
were
not
all
up
to
date.
There
was
no
process
in
place
to
assure
the
provider
that
staff
had
an
up
to
date
registration,
revalidation
or
performance
appraisal
nor
was
there
a
system
in
place
to
check
staff
working
at
the
service
had
undergone
up
to
date
statutory
and
mandatory
training.
There
was
a
limited
governance
processes
in
place,
and
this
did
not
include
how
the
provider
monitored
performance
to
ensure
care
and
treatment
was
delivered
in
line
with
national
guidance
or
the
regulations.
The
provider
did
not
have
a
safeguarding
policy
that
was
accessible
to
all
staff.
The
safeguarding
lead
had
not
undergone
the
relevant
training
required
to
be
a
safeguarding
lead
and
the
staff
we
spoke
with
did
not
fully
understand
their
responsibilities
in
relation
to
safeguarding
vulnerable
adults
or
children
or
who
they
would
contact
should
they
have
concerns
about
the
safety
of
a
person.
There
was
limited
evidence
of
cleaning
schedules
and
when
we
inspected
the
clinic
rooms,
we
found
some
equipment
to
be
visibly
dusty.
National
guidance
had
not
been
followed
for
two
procedures
carried
out
in
theatre.
This
increased
the
infection
control
risk
to
patients.
Following
this
inspection,
under
Section
31
of
the
Health
and
Social
Care
Act
2008,
we
suspended
the
provider
in
respect
to
the
regulated
activities
for
a
limited
time
to
give
the
provider
opportunity
to
take
action
to
reduce
risks
to
patients.
We
took
this
urgent
action
as
we
believed
a
person
would
or
may
be
exposed
to
the
risk
of
harm
if
we
had
not
done
so.’
